PDA

View Full Version : Guess DeMarcus' Measurements!



Shammrog
06-03-2008, 11:28 AM
Well, haven't seen the pre-draft camp measurements come out yet. So, a little fun...

I predict that he will be like 6'2" 1/4 (without shoes), 6'3" 1/2 with shoes, and with a standing reach of 8'7". I am totally guessing his one-step vertical at 35", and that he will do 24 reps with 185 lbs. in the bench press.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
06-03-2008, 11:38 AM
wingspan 6'9

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 11:44 AM
wingspan 6'9


Ah - forgot that one. I have read before his wingspan is 7 feet or slightly over; hence the 8'7" standing reach... Also, I predict his body fat will be "= bamboo."

watzone
06-03-2008, 11:53 AM
Do they measure heart?

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 12:05 PM
Do they measure heart?

No. If they did DeMarcus would be the first pick. :D

Inonehand
06-03-2008, 12:09 PM
Do they measure heart?

Size of a small planet.

Gunnar Kaufman
06-03-2008, 12:28 PM
His standing vertical should approach 40 inches or so.

If he eclipses 20 reps at 185 pounds, it'd be awfully impressive. But strength, heart and athleticism have never been his weaknesses.

CDu
06-03-2008, 12:40 PM
His standing vertical should approach 40 inches or so.

If he eclipses 20 reps at 185 pounds, it'd be awfully impressive. But strength, heart and athleticism have never been his weaknesses.

According to this website, the highest standing vertical was recorded by Patrick Ewing Jr, at 35 inches. The highest max vertical was recorded by both Ewing Jr and OJ Mayo (42 inches).

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Partial-Measurements-and-Combine-Results-Released-2911/

It's only a partial list focusing mainly on the lottery guys, so nothing on Nelson.

Interestingly, Rose measured an inch or so shorter than expected. That's less of a concern since he's a PG, but one of his attributes was his size at the position. He did have a really wide wingspan, though. And he has the hops (40 inch vertical) and the speed (3.05 in the 3/4 court sprint).

Beasley and Love were also undersized for their positions, though Love did show surprising athleticism.

Gunnar Kaufman
06-03-2008, 12:46 PM
According to this website, the highest standing vertical was recorded by Patrick Ewing Jr, at 35 inches. The highest max vertical was recorded by both Ewing Jr and OJ Mayo (42 inches).

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Partial-Measurements-and-Combine-Results-Released-2911/

It's only a partial list focusing mainly on the lottery guys, so nothing on Nelson.

Interestingly, Rose measured an inch or so shorter than expected. That's less of a concern since he's a PG, but one of his attributes was his size at the position. He did have a really wide wingspan, though. And he has the hops (40 inch vertical) and the speed (3.05 in the 3/4 court sprint).

Beasley and Love were also undersized for their positions, though Love did show surprising athleticism.

Thanks, CDU. I guess he can't leap over a building in a single bound after all. :)

MChambers
06-03-2008, 12:48 PM
According to this website, the highest standing vertical was recorded by Patrick Ewing Jr, at 35 inches. The highest max vertical was recorded by both Ewing Jr and OJ Mayo (42 inches).

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Partial-Measurements-and-Combine-Results-Released-2911/

It's only a partial list focusing mainly on the lottery guys, so nothing on Nelson.

Interestingly, Rose measured an inch or so shorter than expected. That's less of a concern since he's a PG, but one of his attributes was his size at the position. He did have a really wide wingspan, though. And he has the hops (40 inch vertical) and the speed (3.05 in the 3/4 court sprint).

Beasley and Love were also undersized for their positions, though Love did show surprising athleticism.

That the linked article says John Riek has an amazing wingspan and standing reach. Think that thread on him will reappear?

Bluedog
06-03-2008, 01:21 PM
I like it how they say Beasley has a "slightly high body fat at 7.7%," while Love is "very high at 12.9%." haha. I guess over 10% is super high for an NBA-level athlete...7.7% sounds super low to me! ;)

SilkyJ
06-03-2008, 01:31 PM
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=2008&sort2=ASC&draft=0&sort=

Demarcus is 6'1 w/o shoes, 6'2.25 w/ shoes.
Wingspan: 6'10"
Standing Reach: 8'2.5"

Lane agility time of 10.54 (1st!!)
4.5% body fat (10th best overall)
19 reps on the bench (tied-6th, with Beasley and Dorsey..and Dorsey is HUGE)
standing vertical of 34.5 (tied-2nd)
max vert of 38.5 (tied-8th).

He probably comes in somewhere in the top 5 or 10 here. Height hurts him, but this may help him overall in terms of draft position. At the end of the day I think it will come down to individual workouts.

CDu
06-03-2008, 01:39 PM
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=2008&sort2=ASC&draft=0&sort=

Demarcus is 6'1 w/o shoes, 6'2 1/4 w/ shoes.

Lane agility time of 10.54 (1st!!)
4.5% body fat (10th best overall)
19 reps on the bench (tied-6th, with Beasley and Dorsey..and Dorsey is HUGE)
standing vertical of 34.5 (tied-2nd)
max vert of 38.5 (tied-8th).

Wow, that height is worse than I thought. That's PG size, even with his freakish wingspan. Teams are not going to like that. He's got a small forward's game in a point guard's body.



He probably comes in somewhere in the top 5 or 10 here. Height hurts him, but this may help him overall in terms of draft position. At the end of the day I think it will come down to individual workouts.

I think the height hurts more than the athleticism helps. The NBA tends to place a lot of value on those height measurements, and being just over 6'2" in shoes makes him PG size. And even with his incredible wingspan, his standing reach would still make him an undersized shooting guard. That, combined with the lack of ballhandling

Everyone knew he was really athletic. The question will be whether or not he can show the ability to hit jumpers off the dribble and off screens in the individual workouts, and whether he can show some ballhandling ability. But we were all assuming he'd be 6'2"-6'3" without shoes, not 6'1". That's a big difference.

mr. synellinden
06-03-2008, 01:42 PM
http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/?year=2008&sort2=ASC&draft=0&sort=

Demarcus is 6'1 w/o shoes, 6'2.25 w/ shoes.
Wingspan: 6'10"
Standing Reach: 8'2.5"

Lane agility time of 10.54 (1st!!)
4.5% body fat (10th best overall)
19 reps on the bench (tied-6th, with Beasley and Dorsey..and Dorsey is HUGE)
standing vertical of 34.5 (tied-2nd)
max vert of 38.5 (tied-8th).

He probably comes in somewhere in the top 5 or 10 here. Height hurts him, but this may help him overall in terms of draft position. At the end of the day I think it will come down to individual workouts.


The sizes without shoes are astonishing.

Joey Dorsey 6' 6.25"

Kevin Love 6' 7.75"

Sasha Kaun 6'7"

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 01:44 PM
Wow, that height is worse than I thought. That's PG size, even with his freakish wingspan. Teams are not going to like that. He's got a small forward's game in a point guard's body.


Yeah - as I said on the Orlando Camp thread, I knew his 6'4" height was total bull; but not by that much. That will really hurt him draft-wise.

Overall, though, he tested even better than I thought he would - I think he was first overall in the lane agility drill, and towards the top in the 3/4 court sprint. I think he is best undrafted so he can pick the best FA opportunity. The NBA is probably down the road (if then) after a few years in Europe though.

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 01:48 PM
The sizes without shoes are astonishing.

Joey Dorsey 6' 6.25"

Kevin Love 6' 7.75"

Sasha Kaun 6'7"


Doesn't it crack you up? I think Kaun was listed at 6'10" - Dorsey was 6'9" and Love 6'10"

(I guess that is why they start ACTUALLY MEASURING THEM now! :D)

I think the "with shoes" measurement is bogus anyway - if anything, the no shoes/shoes difference should be a standard amount so no advantage is gained by wearing certain shoes.

In principle, your height is your height barefoot! E.g., Shammrog is 5'11 1/2; not 6'1" (in shoes), 6'2" (according to the standards above), or 6'3" (DeMarcus listing.)

redick4pres
06-03-2008, 01:52 PM
His standing vertical should approach 40 inches or so.

If he eclipses 20 reps at 185 pounds, it'd be awfully impressive. But strength, heart and athleticism have never been his weaknesses.

He will absolutely eclipse 20 reps at 185 pounds. I'm a high school football and baseball coach and almost all of our football and most of our baseball guys can eclipse 20 reps. Not many of them, mind you, looks anything close to Markie's build and muscle tone. I will be absolutely shocked if he doesn't get close to 30 reps! He's not doing the NFL weight of 225lbs. remember!

CDu
06-03-2008, 01:53 PM
The sizes without shoes are astonishing.

Joey Dorsey 6' 6.25"

Kevin Love 6' 7.75"

Sasha Kaun 6'7"

The measurements for Dorsey and Love are probably an inch shorter than should be expected. Dorsey was listed as 6'8" in college, and Love was listed at 6'10". So with shoes, they were both in the neighborhood of their listed heights.

The measurement for Kaun is truly unbelievable, though. He's generally been listed as 6'11" elsewhere. To measure out at under 6'9" in shoes means he will be playing in Europe for sure.

CDu
06-03-2008, 01:54 PM
He will absolutely eclipse 20 reps at 185 pounds. I'm a high school football and baseball coach and almost all of our football and most of our baseball guys can eclipse 20 reps. Not many of them, mind you, looks anything close to Markie's build and muscle tone. I will be absolutely shocked if he doesn't get close to 30 reps! He's not doing the NFL weight of 225lbs. remember!

He got 19 reps, second-most among guards behind Burrell of Xavier.

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 01:58 PM
The measurements for Dorsey and Love are probably an inch shorter than should be expected. Dorsey was listed as 6'8" in college, and Love was listed at 6'10". So with shoes, they were both in the neighborhood of their listed heights.

The measurement for Kaun is truly unbelievable, though. He's generally been listed as 6'11" elsewhere. To measure out at under 6'9" in shoes means he will be playing in Europe for sure.

Not only that, but Kaun shoes 6'7" without shoes, 6'8.75" with shoes. So, they let him wear pumps apparently...

As an aside, I always thought Duke was basically very honest with their listed measurements. Not this time... :)

Bluedog
06-03-2008, 01:59 PM
The measurements for Dorsey and Love are probably an inch shorter than should be expected. Dorsey was listed as 6'8" in college, and Love was listed at 6'10". So with shoes, they were both in the neighborhood of their listed heights.

The measurement for Kaun is truly unbelievable, though. He's generally been listed as 6'11" elsewhere. To measure out at under 6'9" in shoes means he will be playing in Europe for sure.

Well, at least Kaun has a pretty ridiculous 9' 2" standing reach (6th highest and 4 inches more than Love).


He will absolutely eclipse 20 reps at 185 pounds. I'm a high school football and baseball coach and almost all of our football and most of our baseball guys can eclipse 20 reps. Not many of them, mind you, looks anything close to Markie's build and muscle tone. I will be absolutely shocked if he doesn't get close to 30 reps! He's not doing the NFL weight of 225lbs. remember!

Well, he was close at 19! Only 5 players eclipsed 20 reps and all of them but one have at least 24 lbs on DeMarcus. I guess in the camp they definitely make sure you get all the way down or add some extra pressure, or your high school players are stronger than elite NBA talent, but I find that hard to believe....

CDu
06-03-2008, 02:02 PM
Not only that, but Kaun shoes 6'7" without shoes, 6'8.75" with shoes. So, they let him wear pumps apparently...

As an aside, I always thought Duke was basically very honest with their listed measurements. Not this time... :)

Yeah, I always felt the 6'4" was way off for Nelson. He looked to be about the same height as Paulus. I think in general we aren't too misleading, though. Redick measured out slightly taller than his listed height of 6'4", in fact.

I still don't get why they include measurements in shoes. It's silly, and it's ridiculous that there is up to an inch difference in the differences between in and out of shoe measurements for these guys.

Huh?
06-03-2008, 02:10 PM
I figured Nelson to be about that height, just from looking at him standing in the huddle. If Demarcus isn't drafted there should be GM's fired. I know Damon Stoudamire's oldass isn't better than Nelson right now. And I'm sure he would lock down Chris Quinn. I'm tired of thinking right now so is there someone else anyone can think about who Nelson would handle?

CDu
06-03-2008, 02:18 PM
I figured Nelson to be about that height, just from looking at him standing in the huddle. If Demarcus isn't drafted there should be GM's fired. I know Damon Stoudamire's oldass isn't better than Nelson right now. And I'm sure he would lock down Chris Quinn. I'm tired of thinking right now so is there someone else anyone can think about who Nelson would handle?

Stoudamire and Quinn are point guards, so the comparison is irrelevant. Nelson can't play PG. Quinn is on a roster because he can shoot really well from three point range and play backup PG. Stoudamire is soon to be out of the league, and he is also a PG.

Nelson can probably defend most backup PG in the NBA. But he can't play that position on the other end of the floor, and he's probably going to be too small to be a lockdown defender at the SG spot. And even at SG, his skillset is limited (not good enough a ballhandler and can't shoot off the dribble/off screens).

If Nelson is selected, it's going to be in the second round. And I won't be surprised if he goes undrafted. That's not evidence that GMs should be fired. Nelson is a small forward in a point guard's body. In college, you can get away with that (even thrive, like Nelson did). In the NBA, you can't.

crimsonandblue
06-03-2008, 02:50 PM
Well, while Kansas may have overstated Kaun's height, they significantly understated Darrell Arthur's. The first 66 footer in league history, I'd expect.

And I seriously doubt Kaun is only 6'7" but with a 7'6" wingspan. I think his and probably Arthur's heights are a little off.

GopherBlue
06-03-2008, 03:01 PM
Wow, that height is worse than I thought. That's PG size, even with his freakish wingspan. Teams are not going to like that. He's got a small forward's game in a point guard's body.
. . . .
But we were all assuming he'd be 6'2"-6'3" without shoes, not 6'1". That's a big difference.

Why is it that we are so often surprised by actual height? If you've ever stood near Demarcus, he is clearly in the 6'1"-6'2" range, not the 6'4" listed on the roster. Makes you wonder how tall the 6'4"-listed Gerald Henderson really is.

Height, unlike bench reps and standing vertical, is something you cannot easily disguise for 4 years, and yet . . .

Draft-stat of the day:
"Kevin Love measured out reasonably welló6-9 Ĺ in shoes (6-7 ĺ without)" - makes you wonder what shoes he wears to add 1.75" to his height.

CDu
06-03-2008, 03:06 PM
Why is it that we are so often surprised by actual height? If you've ever stood near Demarcus, he is clearly in the 6'1"-6'2" range, not the 6'4" listed on the roster. Makes you wonder how tall the 6'4"-listed Gerald Henderson really is.

Height, unlike bench reps and standing vertical, is something you cannot easily disguise for 4 years, and yet . . .

Draft-stat of the day:
"Kevin Love measured out reasonably welló6-9 Ĺ in shoes (6-7 ĺ without)" - makes you wonder what shoes he wears to add 1.75" to his height.

Well, I've never stood near Nelson, so that's probably got something to do with why I was surprised. I will say that I didn't ever think he was 6'4", but probably 6'2"-ish. I'm certainly not shocked, but he is shorter than I though. He definitely looked shorter than Henderson. I'm not sure how tall Henderson is, either, but he at least LOOKS 6'4".

GopherBlue
06-03-2008, 03:23 PM
I suspect Gerald is at least in the ballpark of the 6'4" he is listed.

Taylor King (listed 6'6") and Lance Thomas (listed 6'8") also look 'less tall' than they are listed on the roster.

Huh?
06-03-2008, 03:31 PM
CDU, what a hater.

CDu
06-03-2008, 03:36 PM
CDU, what a hater.

A hater? I'm far from it. Nelson was one of my favorite players. There's a difference between being a hater and being realistic. I definitely hope Nelson makes a team. I just don't think he's going to get drafted at anything above the late-second round, and I have trouble seeing how his game (which is that of a small forward) translates to the NBA given his size (which is that of a point guard). Just because I'm not blindly optimistic about his chances doesn't make me a hater.

lazee
06-03-2008, 03:47 PM
I didn't think he was 6'4" based on him standing next to JJ (who actually is a legit 6'4" w/o shoes) in huddles and such, but I didn't think he was 6'1" (maybe 6'2"-6'3"). Do you think if he improves his handles, he can play PG?

SilkyJ
06-03-2008, 03:48 PM
A hater? I'm far from it. Nelson was one of my favorite players. There's a difference between being a hater and being realistic. I definitely hope Nelson makes a team. I just don't think he's going to get drafted at anything above the late-second round, and I have trouble seeing how his game (which is that of a small forward) translates to the NBA given his size (which is that of a point guard). Just because I'm not blindly optimistic about his chances doesn't make me a hater.

i agree with ya. i really am quite surprised to see him come in at that height but oh well. I think he can play his way onto a roster in the next couple of years after a stint in the NBDL. that's my predicition anyways...

bdh21
06-03-2008, 03:53 PM
Uhhh guys... I don't know where all this Kaun info comes from, but DraftExpress lists his measurements as 6'9" without shoes and 6'10.75" in (platform) shoes. That's about what was expected.

CDu
06-03-2008, 03:56 PM
Uhhh guys... I don't know where all this Kaun info comes from, but DraftExpress lists his measurements as 6'9" without shoes and 6'10.75" in (platform) shoes. That's about what was expected.

That's updated. They had a lot of typos, and I guess Kaun's size was one of them. The site previously listed Kaun as 6'7" without shoes and 6'8.75" in shoes. And yes, 6'9" barefoot and 6'10.75" in shoes makes a lot more sense.

crimsonandblue
06-03-2008, 04:07 PM
That's updated. They had a lot of typos, and I guess Kaun's size was one of them. The site previously listed Kaun as 6'7" without shoes and 6'8.75" in shoes. And yes, 6'9" barefoot and 6'10.75" in shoes makes a lot more sense.

And I'm still not sure on some of these. As noted, Kaun's wearing some orthopedic platforms (+1.75") and Darnell Jackson is wearing flip-flops (+.75")

Bluedog
06-03-2008, 04:18 PM
DraftExpress also states "Fastest Lane Agility: Sonny Weems- 10.58 seconds" http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Partial-Measurements-and-Combine-Results-Released-2911/

But then in the grid, it lists DeMarcus as beating Weems with a 10.54 sec time. So, something is wrong there too.

SilkyJ
06-03-2008, 04:24 PM
hmm. Maybe we better wait for the ESPN version to come out. Probably more reliable.

Additionally, they "standardize" their "w/ shoes" by taking the "w/o shoes" measurement and adding .75 inches to that for everyone. A good idea considering what's been noted above.

SilkyJ
06-03-2008, 04:29 PM
speak of the devil -

combine results:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=CombineResults-080603

Height/Weight/Reach etc:
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=Measurements-080603

Turns out this year Ford did not "standardize" the with and without shoes measurements the way he has in the past.

unfortunately these are for "insiders only" and they are only for the top 15-20 players or whatever. If/when they release stats on everyone I'll try to be on top of it...

Shammrog
06-03-2008, 04:34 PM
That's updated. They had a lot of typos, and I guess Kaun's size was one of them. The site previously listed Kaun as 6'7" without shoes and 6'8.75" in shoes. And yes, 6'9" barefoot and 6'10.75" in shoes makes a lot more sense.

Yeah - I looked earlier at their message boards - they got the data in a very "user unfriendly" format and then worked very hard to get the data up as quickly as possible (to their credit.) I expect more corrections to typos, etc.

Carlos
06-03-2008, 04:59 PM
The measurements for Dorsey and Love are probably an inch shorter than should be expected. Dorsey was listed as 6'8" in college, and Love was listed at 6'10". So with shoes, they were both in the neighborhood of their listed heights.

Actually, Memphis listed Dorsey at 6-9 in college and what's more, he played like he was every bit that size. I was really surprised to see him come in at 6-6.

As for Demarcus, at the risk of getting branded a hater, I would say that he stands very little chance on getting drafted and in all likelihood won't make it in the NBA. I hope he does, but my guess is that the things that made him a great college player won't translate into the pros. He'll be a fine player in Europe and make a nice living though.

CDu
06-03-2008, 05:10 PM
Actually, Memphis listed Dorsey at 6-9 in college and what's more, he played like he was every bit that size. I was really surprised to see him come in at 6-6.

As for Demarcus, at the risk of getting branded a hater, I would say that he stands very little chance on getting drafted and in all likelihood won't make it in the NBA. I hope he does, but my guess is that the things that made him a great college player won't translate into the pros. He'll be a fine player in Europe and make a nice living though.

Interesting. I had always thought of Dorsey in the same manner as Ben Wallace - burly, athletic guy with long arms and no offensive game who plays bigger than he really is. Interestingly, Wallace is also frequently listed as 6'9", but is actually about 6'7" (but 7'0" with the afro). I had pictured Dorsey as 6'7"-6'8", so I wasn't too surprised by the height. I hadn't realized he'd been listed at 6'9".

Unfortunately, I agree with you about Nelson. There just aren't 6'2" small forwards in the NBA, and that's basically what Nelson is. Maybe he can improve his ballhandling and shooting and find a spot as a combo guard in a few years. But even if not, there's absolutely nothing wrong with making a living overseas.

SMO
06-03-2008, 05:25 PM
He got 19 reps, second-most among guards behind Burrell of Xavier.

The long arms are what make benching that much difficult. The bar has to go way higher than it would for an ordinary person.

Double DD
06-03-2008, 06:09 PM
The NHL uses a metronome to help count the number of lifts of the bar, and players have to do full lifts at a certain rate to have them count. I'd assum e the NBA has a similar system, which is why players might test out lower on the bench press than what you would expect.

There was some question about accurate heights of some of the players on the team, and some get measured at the high school all-star games they attend. These are some of the results that i could find.

Gerald Henderson
Height: 6-4 w/o shoes Wingspan: 6-10.75

Jon Scheyer
Height: 6-4.25 w/o shoes Wingspan: 6-4.25

Kyle Singler
Height: 6-9 in shoes Wingspan: 6-10

Nolan Smith
Height: 6-3 in shoes Wingspan: 6-6

Jaymf7
06-03-2008, 06:12 PM
Based on my read, it looks like Markie and frontrunner Derrick Rose had nearly identical stats (although markie benched about twice as many reps)...

DeMarcus Nelson 6' 1" 6' 2.25" 196 6' 10" 8' 2.5" 4.5 34.5 38.5 19 10.54 3.13
Derrick Rose 6' 1.5" 6' 2.5" 196 6' 8" 8' 2.5" 4.6 34.5 40.0 10 11.69 3.05

Unfortunately for Markie, Rose has a few more skills. As others have stated, it does not bode well if Markie has the prototypical PG body...

DevilDan
06-03-2008, 08:35 PM
Mr. Jaymf7 ... Terrific and timely understatement: "Rose has a few more skills ... "

And therein lies the story. I like DeMarcus and I'm glad he had four solid (not great) years with Duke. And, despite injuries earlier, he was always a producer.

But the simple fact is, it is highly UNLIKELY that his skill set will get him a spot in the NBA, unless it happens following the draft, from a team that is looking to fill a void. Someone commented previously that his "3 pointer" + "drive to rim" game would work in the NBA.

First, from further back, and needing a JUMP shot, NOT a SET SHOT -- against BETTER defense, playing MORE games (if he plays at all) ... JUST NOT LIKELY.

Second, he may have long arms, but those are of negligible benefit in his slashing moves to the rim. Without a blow-by first step, he will have those shots swatted away with regularity, OR, they'll just give a HARD FOUL, or he'll turn it over (per the final 10-12 games of the season). They know that the odds are, he won't make the Free Throws.

Sorry to be so negative, but we all need to stop crunching numbers, and start looking at performance and skill set. Unless he sets the world on fire with improvement (in a very short time)--the kind that will make scouts and teams think he will be a "Premier" player in the NBA at 6'2" (or is it 6'1 1/2"?), he's going to need to look at other options. I hope he proves me wrong. Wishing him the best ...

devilirium
06-03-2008, 08:50 PM
I never understood the fascination with height with shoes and height without shoes.

Players don't play without shoes, and from what I can tell there's no need to worry about a player wearing platform shoes....it seems idiotic to worry about that to me. You're talking at most....1 1/2-2 inches?

mgtr
06-03-2008, 09:12 PM
I was happy to have Nelson as a player at Duke, but he was a good but not great player. Redick was a great player. Redick has struggled in the NBA, so to expect a lesser player to make it is incredibly optimistic.
Nelson would be far better served to play a few years abroad, and maybe improve his game, either as a 1 or 2, and then try for the NBA.
Of course we would like to see him play in the US, but there is money to be made overseas. I wish him great success there.

Double DD
06-03-2008, 09:32 PM
I never understood the fascination with height with shoes and height without shoes.

Players don't play without shoes, and from what I can tell there's no need to worry about a player wearing platform shoes....it seems idiotic to worry about that to me. You're talking at most....1 1/2-2 inches?

There tends to be a large variance in the type of shoes players wear. Over the years of following the draft I've seen players at the combine range from 1/2 inch to 2 inches in terms of how much height a shoe adds. A big man who measures out at 6'8" tends to be viewed a lot differently than who measures out at over 6'9". One's a tweener without a true position, the other has enough size to play power forward.

Personally I think it makes more sense to list all players in their height w/o shoes like every other sport does, but noone wants to change tradition.

Huh?
06-03-2008, 09:52 PM
so how tall was Mugsy w/o shoes? 5'2" .2637

CameronCrazy'11
06-03-2008, 11:23 PM
so how tall was Mugsy w/o shoes? 5'2" .2637

And i think Zoubek is more like 6'4". He doesn't look that tall walking around campus.

DmxsCreator
06-04-2008, 12:52 AM
Hey I had hoped that the results of this camp would change some of the myths and misinformation that seems to circulate about DeMarcus Nelson.

Maybe its the fact that he owns the California high school scoring record. I've watched him play since high school when he scored at an average of 30 pts per game.

Maybe its the fact that he went to Duke and that his style of play was altered by the Duke staff to be more fully in alignment with JJ Redick's style of play.

He did get hurt twice while at Duke but managed to play four years of high school basketball and football without an injury. Hmm...

If you were to go back and watch the games he played in his 1st two years at Duke you would notice that when Demarcus would miss a single shot he was promptly removed from the game.

By the time he was needed to be the "goto" guy the damage had already been done. Now that he is away from that atmosphere, he is now starting to regain his scoring edge.

In any case he seems to get diss'd a lot. But look at his camp results.

Game#1 - 13 pts (somewhat of a shaky game, but better than most others on the first game day)
Game#2 - 22 pts (good game, very good all around performance)
Game#3 - 13 pts (good game, very good all around performance)

Incidentally he made 80% of his free throws during Games 2 & 3.

Height - 6' 1"
This means that he is taller than Tyrone Brazelton, DJ Augustin, Ty Lawson, Sean Singletary, Lester Hudson, Drew Neitzel, Brian Roberts, Jamar Butler, Ronald Steele, Russell Robinson, Jeremy Pargo and Mike Taylor.

Weight - 198 with only 4.5% body fat.

Wingspan - 6' 10"
This means he has a wingspan better that 31 other player's in the camp including Drew Neitzel, Joe Crawford, Wayne Ellington, Russell Westbrook, Malik Hairston, Bryce Taylor, Deron Washington and Sonny Weems.

Max Vert - 38.5
Only seven people jumped higher, Patrick Ewing + 3.5", O.J. Mayo + 2.5", Bryce Taylor + 2.5", Derrick Rose + 1.5", Deron Washington + 1.5", Eric Gordon + 1.5" and Mike Taylor + 0.5".

Bench Press - 19
Only five people push more weight Josh Duncan (26), Joe Alexander (24), Takais Brown (22), Stanley Burrell (21), and DeVon Hardin (20).

Lane Agility - 10.54
No one was faster, Sonny Weems was the closest with 10.58.

3/4 Court Sprint - 3.13
Again he was as fast or faster than 90% of those tested including Luc Richard Mbah a Moute, Othello Hunter, Joey Dorsey, Shan Foster, Gary Forbes, Marcelus Kemp and Robert Vaden.

If you combine Lane Agility with the Court Sprint it looks like a descent first step to me!

Considering all of this, and the fact that he was ACC defensive player of the year, why does he go so underrated?

My guess is that he has a quiet style of play that reflects his personality and most fans want flash and style.

Demarcus will be drafted high to mid 2nd round because when taken as a whole and considering his work ethic, he is one of the best SG's around.

Jumbo
06-04-2008, 01:43 AM
Hey I had hoped that the results of this camp would change some of the myths and misinformation that seems to circulate about DeMarcus Nelson.

Maybe its the fact that he owns the California high school scoring record. I've watched him play since high school when he scored at an average of 30 pts per game.

Maybe its the fact that he went to Duke and that his style of play was altered by the Duke staff to be more fully in alignment with JJ Redick's style of play.

He did get hurt twice while at Duke but managed to play four years of high school basketball and football without an injury. Hmm...

If you were to go back and watch the games he played in his 1st two years at Duke you would notice that when Demarcus would miss a single shot he was promptly removed from the game.

By the time he was needed to be the "goto" guy the damage had already been done. Now that he is away from that atmosphere, he is now starting to regain his scoring edge.

I'll answer this as best I can, as someone who loves and appreciates basketball and has a pretty good understanding of the NBA.

Markie was unfairly lambasted by some posters following Duke's loss to WVU. He had a poor game, and didn't finish strong at the end of the season, but he was the best player most of the year for a really good team and did whatever was asked of him, especially given how small Duke had to play this year. I'll always appreciate his effort at Duke.

I consider myself realistic about his pro potential. I've said all along that I thought he was probably 6'2" and the Orlando tests proved that. In the NBA, that's pretty much too small to be a SG. To succeed, he'll have to be on a team with another primary ball-handler. I could see him effectively guarding point guards, but so many NBA SGs are 6'6" or taller that even with his freakish wingspan, he'll get abused in the post. That's a problem.

The other issue is that he doesn't have point guard skills on offense. He tends to dribble with his head down. His jump shot is awkward -- the form is poor and this hurts him at the line, as well. So, right now he is a great athlete without a position. To make it in the NBA, he will have to refine his skills. Maybe that'll happen by training camp. Maybe it will happen after a couple of years overseas. Maybe it will never happen. Who knows?

What I don't like about your post is the implication that Duke/K is to blame for a certain lack of success on Markie's part. So many players, past and present, have complained to a degree about the way they were utilized. Why? Because they were all used to being the man in high school, and suddenly they get thrust into a system where there are lots of players who are just as good or better. I disagree that Markie was pulled after missing shots early in his career -- I remember his getting pulled for poor decision-making, though. It's also silly to essentially blame Duke for his injury woes. Injuries happen, and his were largely of the freak variety. Plus, the amount of time devoted to high school sports and the intensity of that training doesn't even beging to compare to college basketball. So, I'm not surprised that he was healthier in high school.

I wish DeMarcus nothing but the best as he strives to make an NBA team. But just as he shouldn't be blamed for Duke's early exit in the NCAA Tourney, Duke shouldn't be blamed for some of DeMarcus' struggles and/or weaknesses.

DmxsCreator
06-04-2008, 02:32 AM
Obviously I chose the wrong forum to have any tacit anti Duke feelings. Well the truth is that I donít have any anti Duke or anti coach K feelings. A degree from Duke is invaluable. I just listed what I perceived to be the truth in much the same way as you do.

I will refrain from any more posts that suggest the Duke basketball program does not know how to effectively reach and bring out the best in each of their athletes. And anyway I'm not a guy that can dissect the intricacies of basketball.

But like you I also wish the best for DeMarcus.

By the way, did you watch any of the Predraft camp games? I caught them on TV and for all of the well thought out reasonings that you listed in your post, DeMarcus still seems to be able to play well against the other supposedly NBA class hopefuls.

Either the Predraft camp had very sub par participants, which by all available accounts was not the case or DeMarcus has a decent entry level NBA game. I just choose to believe in DeMarcus.

speedevil
06-04-2008, 05:27 AM
Yeah, I always felt the 6'4" was way off for Nelson. He looked to be about the same height as Paulus. I think in general we aren't too misleading, though. Redick measured out slightly taller than his listed height of 6'4", in fact.

I still don't get why they include measurements in shoes. It's silly, and it's ridiculous that there is up to an inch difference in the differences between in and out of shoe measurements for these guys.

They play in shoes, not with bare feet.

speedevil
06-04-2008, 05:39 AM
And i think Zoubek is more like 6'4". He doesn't look that tall walking around campus.

he's 7'1" w/ shoes, 6'7" wing span, and 2" vertical leap

CDu
06-04-2008, 08:20 AM
By the way, did you watch any of the Predraft camp games? I caught them on TV and for all of the well thought out reasonings that you listed in your post, DeMarcus still seems to be able to play well against the other supposedly NBA class hopefuls.

Either the Predraft camp had very sub par participants, which by all available accounts was not the case or DeMarcus has a decent entry level NBA game. I just choose to believe in DeMarcus.

Actually, by all accounts it IS the case that the predraft camp had subpar participants. It always does. None of the real prospects participate in the games. I think Lawson was the only potential first-round pick, and he was a borderline first-round pick. And he only played one game. Nelson played well in a series of games against guys who hope to be second round picks. And I suspect he played well in the same manner as he did in college, which as has been discussed probably isn't going to translate to the NBA.

We all wish Nelson the best. He was a class act and a fierce competitor in four years at Duke. Nobody on this site is pulling against him making it. But bringing up his tremendous high school achievements is completely irrelevant when discussing his pro prospects. Unless he is able to greatly improve his ballhandling skills, he'll continue to be a small forward in a point guard's body. That's not going to work. It's not to say he can't make something of himself in the NBA, just that what he's shown to this point isn't going to cut it in the NBA.

Carlos
06-04-2008, 08:55 AM
Obviously I chose the wrong forum to have any tacit anti Duke feelings. Well the truth is that I donít have any anti Duke or anti coach K feelings. A degree from Duke is invaluable. I just listed what I perceived to be the truth in much the same way as you do.

I will refrain from any more posts that suggest the Duke basketball program does not know how to effectively reach and bring out the best in each of their athletes. And anyway I'm not a guy that can dissect the intricacies of basketball.

You didn't choose the wrong forum to have any tacit anti-Duke feelings. You chose the wrong forum to have any tacit anti-Duke feelings without offering something up to substantiate them.

You stated:


Maybe its the fact that he went to Duke and that his style of play was altered by the Duke staff to be more fully in alignment with JJ Redick's style of play.

Lots of guys - especially guys who are 6-1 but score a lot inside in HS - end up altering their style of play once they get to college. Nate James as a 6-6 inside player in HS and ended up as one of Duke's best perimeter defenders and a valuable player on the wing. No doubt Nelson was asked to take a back seat to JJ in terms of scoring options at Duke. But since JJ was such a prolific scorer that's not too unexpected.

Simply put, if you want us to believe that Nelson's style of play was somehow changed in a way that was detrimental to him, you're going to have to come up with some explanation of what those changes were.



He did get hurt twice while at Duke but managed to play four years of high school basketball and football without an injury. Hmm...

What are you implying? How exactly is Duke responsible for Nelson's injuries?


If you were to go back and watch the games he played in his 1st two years at Duke you would notice that when Demarcus would miss a single shot he was promptly removed from the game.

Lots of guys are on a short leash their first couple of years in college. Nelson played 30 mpg in each of the last two seasons - don't you think that's enough time to undo any of that psychological trauma that he must have suffered in his first two seasons?


By the time he was needed to be the "goto" guy the damage had already been done. Now that he is away from that atmosphere, he is now starting to regain his scoring edge.

You base this on a sample size of 3 games. That's 3 games where he averaged 16 points. Say as opposed to all last season where he averaged 14.5 points. Is it that 10% increase in his scoring that makes the difference here? You could cherry pick a run of a few games out of last year's season where Nelson averaged 20 ppg and say that he's underperforming at the camp.

Like I said, nobody should have a problem with you having these "tacit anti-Duke" feelings. All I would ask is that you bring it a little stronger than what you've tossed out thus far.

ArnieMc
06-04-2008, 09:00 AM
Let's see, DeMarcus has great agility, speed, quickness, and wingspan. He is strong, he can jump, he is in great shape, and he is a lockdown defender. The areas where he has problems are dribbling and shooting. Hmmm, sounds like a defensive back or maybe a wide receiver to me. He should have another year of eligibility. Maybe he would like to play for Coach Cut for a year.

gvtucker
06-04-2008, 09:17 AM
Let's see, DeMarcus has great agility, speed, quickness, and wingspan. He is strong, he can jump, he is in great shape, and he is a lockdown defender. The areas where he has problems are dribbling and shooting. Hmmm, sounds like a defensive back or maybe a wide receiver to me. He should have another year of eligibility. Maybe he would like to play for Coach Cut for a year.

I've always thought that he would be an awesome decathlete.

dukeENG2003
06-04-2008, 09:46 AM
he'll get abused in the post. That's a problem.


I agree with most of your post, except this. SG's aren't usually good at posting up anyways, and as the camp proved, Demarcus is stronger, longer, adn can jump higher than a lot of SG's. Remember, he played at the 4 sometimes in college, and did so succesfully. Wingspan, leaping ability, and length can make up for a lack of height, ESPECIALLY when you are guarding a shooting guard in the post. For a shooting guard to post you up, they've got to have length to shoot over you, and they have to be able to back you down to get deep into the post. I'll believe that most NBA SG's can do the former, but the latter; no way.

I'm not saying he can guard a 4 in the pros, but if you can guard a 4 in college, you can handle a 2 in the post in the pros.

I worry more about his ability to guard the mid range pull-up (Rip hamilton would torch him IMO).

rthomas
06-04-2008, 10:04 AM
Joe Alexander's stats are huge!

No step vertical: 32.5 (8th)
Max vertical: 38.5 (8th tied with Markie)
Bench press: 24 (2nd)
Court sprint: 2.99 (2nd by 0.03 sec)

Moving on up.

CDu
06-04-2008, 10:10 AM
Joe Alexander's stats are huge!

No step vertical: 32.5 (8th)
Max vertical: 38.5 (8th tied with Markie)
Bench press: 24 (2nd)
Court sprint: 2.99 (2nd by 0.03 sec)

Moving on up.


I agree with most of your post, except this. SG's aren't usually good at posting up anyways, and as the camp proved, Demarcus is stronger, longer, adn can jump higher than a lot of SG's. Remember, he played at the 4 sometimes in college, and did so succesfully. Wingspan, leaping ability, and length can make up for a lack of height, ESPECIALLY when you are guarding a shooting guard in the post. For a shooting guard to post you up, they've got to have length to shoot over you, and they have to be able to back you down to get deep into the post. I'll believe that most NBA SG's can do the former, but the latter; no way.

I'm not saying he can guard a 4 in the pros, but if you can guard a 4 in college, you can handle a 2 in the post in the pros.

I worry more about his ability to guard the mid range pull-up (Rip hamilton would torch him IMO).

Most NBA shooting guards will be able to shoot over Nelson. They'll have the length advantage. While they won't be able to back Nelson under the rim, they will be able to get close enough to shoot 12-15 foot turnarounds over him, which should be a gimme for an NBA shooting guard. That's similar to the mid-range pull-up, but that also tends to be the extent of the post game that you see from most NBA shooting guards.

gvtucker
06-04-2008, 10:34 AM
I agree with most of your post, except this. SG's aren't usually good at posting up anyways, and as the camp proved, Demarcus is stronger, longer, adn can jump higher than a lot of SG's.

The camp proved that he is stronger, longer, and can jump higher than a lot of shooting guards that will play professionally in Europe.

90% of the people at the Orlando camp will never play a second of ball in the NBA. College shooting guards might not be very good at posting up, but that isn't the case for NBA shooting guards.

I hate saying this, because I really love the way DeMarcus plays basketball, and I love his attitude and his heart, but his chances of playing in the NBA aren't very good. He's got a shot, but it is only a slim shot.

MHTorringjan
06-04-2008, 11:25 AM
So, the draft site that I like to look at (nbadraft.net) actually seemed fairly impressed by Demarcus' performance aside from the first game, where his shooting percentage was down. However, due to the sheer number of shots he took, he still scored the points. The point is, in those games, he showed himself to be not necessarily an explosive scorer, but a consistent scorer against players of equal or lesser skills (granted, this is the operative part of the Orlando Camp, but I stand by my point).

The analysis on there (which was free, so I can share it ;-)) seemed rather convinced he'd be taken later in the draft (mid-to-late second round) just because of how well he performed in the games and his combine measurements. I'm personally optimistic, and would be somewhat surprised if he wasn't taken very late in the draft. Anyway, all arguments of size aside (which is, granted still a concern for many teams), I'm still convinced that he has the skills to be a decent bench player for the right team.

As an aside, what sort of Wheaties has he been eating to get his FT percentage up to 88% in the Orlando games? I want some for myself.

M.H.

unexpected
06-04-2008, 12:10 PM
Let's see, DeMarcus has great agility, speed, quickness, and wingspan. He is strong, he can jump, he is in great shape, and he is a lockdown defender. The areas where he has problems are dribbling and shooting. Hmmm, sounds like a defensive back or maybe a wide receiver to me. He should have another year of eligibility. Maybe he would like to play for Coach Cut for a year.

I know!! DeMarcus's measurements are eerily similar to T.O's. Anyone know his HS football stats?

GopherBlue
06-04-2008, 01:36 PM
I've always thought that he would be an awesome decathlete.

I actually see him as more of a biathlon kind of guy ;)

Edouble
06-04-2008, 01:50 PM
I actually see him as more of a biathlon kind of guy ;)

That would probably be his worst event. Having to stand still and shoot at a target with your heart rate up is eerily similar to free throw shooting, albeit Nelson has seemed to improve his performance in that department as of late.

gvtucker
06-04-2008, 01:53 PM
I actually see him as more of a biathlon kind of guy ;)

Wouldn't surprise me if he's never been on cross country skis or fired an air rifle.

gvtucker
06-04-2008, 01:54 PM
I know!! DeMarcus's measurements are eerily similar to T.O's. Anyone know his HS football stats?

DeMarcus was an all state QB in high school.

ForeverBlowingBubbles
06-04-2008, 02:10 PM
So, the draft site that I like to look at (nbadraft.net) actually seemed fairly impressed by Demarcus' performance aside from the first game, where his shooting percentage was down. However, due to the sheer number of shots he took, he still scored the points. The point is, in those games, he showed himself to be not necessarily an explosive scorer, but a consistent scorer against players of equal or lesser skills (granted, this is the operative part of the Orlando Camp, but I stand by my point).

The analysis on there (which was free, so I can share it ;-)) seemed rather convinced he'd be taken later in the draft (mid-to-late second round) just because of how well he performed in the games and his combine measurements. I'm personally optimistic, and would be somewhat surprised if he wasn't taken very late in the draft. Anyway, all arguments of size aside (which is, granted still a concern for many teams), I'm still convinced that he has the skills to be a decent bench player for the right team.

As an aside, what sort of Wheaties has he been eating to get his FT percentage up to 88% in the Orlando games? I want some for myself.

M.H.

As far as your Wheaties go, 3 games is of no significant sample size as far as free throws are concerned.

johnb
06-04-2008, 04:17 PM
I know!! DeMarcus's measurements are eerily similar to T.O's. Anyone know his HS football stats?

first team all state qb, california, as a soph.

but if he'd been all acc as a qb, we'd now be talking about how he wouldn't make the nfl because of his height.

Huh?
06-04-2008, 05:03 PM
DMXsCreator...FINALLY! A believer like myself.

78% of the players in the NBA can't shoot anyways.

CDu
06-04-2008, 05:19 PM
DMXsCreator...FINALLY! A believer like myself.

78% of the players in the NBA can't shoot anyways.

You obviously don't watch much NBA if you think the players can't shoot.

pete
06-04-2008, 07:50 PM
I saw Markie play football in high school. He was starting quarterback as a freshman and sophomore and absolutely unbelievable. He had at least 1000 yards passing and rushing in a 10 game season playing for Vallejo High School against Division I teams which out here in California is the large school division. He would have easily played Division I football and who knows how far he would have gone. My prediction is late 2nd round pick 55-60 somewhere in there and if not he will make six figures a year in Europe which ain't too bad.

Huh?
06-04-2008, 09:01 PM
I have never seen a basketball game with Duke not playing.

Edouble
06-04-2008, 11:17 PM
I have never seen a basketball game with Duke not playing.

Then why are you commenting about the NBA?

dukelifer
06-05-2008, 07:23 AM
"Heís a pretty remarkable kid. He had an unbelievable career and I can understand that. Heís a great kid. Heís well coached. Heís unbelievably competitive and heís a terrific athlete. Heís going to be in our league. I donít know where and I donít know when, but heís going to be in our league. Heíll just find a way to make a team better. He certainly has the size and strength to compete on this level. He was much more skilled than I thought, so I was real excited about him."

redick4pres
06-05-2008, 09:11 AM
Well, at least Kaun has a pretty ridiculous 9' 2" standing reach (6th highest and 4 inches more than Love).



Well, he was close at 19! Only 5 players eclipsed 20 reps and all of them but one have at least 24 lbs on DeMarcus. I guess in the camp they definitely make sure you get all the way down or add some extra pressure, or your high school players are stronger than elite NBA talent, but I find that hard to believe....


So are we sure that the NBA rep weight is 185lbs? I am totally shocked that what most people consider the best athletes in the world(professional basketball players) aren't any stronger. We have high school sophs. that can do 225lbs 25 or more times. Heck, my roomate who weighs about 190 can sit down and bang out 22 reps at 185 right now! I'm thinking maybe the weight is 225lbs.

Bluedog
06-05-2008, 09:46 AM
So are we sure that the NBA rep weight is 185lbs? I am totally shocked that what most people consider the best athletes in the world(professional basketball players) aren't any stronger. We have high school sophs. that can do 225lbs 25 or more times. Heck, my roomate who weighs about 190 can sit down and bang out 22 reps at 185 right now! I'm thinking maybe the weight is 225lbs.

Don't really know for sure, but the rep numbers sure are interesting. Little Sean Singletary (5'11" 184 lbs) had 18 reps, while Donte Green (6'9" 221 lbs) had a measly 2. TWO?! Seems hard to believe. Others with 2 include Patrick Ewing and Davon Jefferson. I agree that it seems odd that they could only do 2 at 185 lbs. James Gist who I thought was a beast only managed 5. How is it possible that Drew Nietzel can do twice as many reps as Gist? These numbers seem almost made up....but perhaps I'm just not a very good judge of chest strength.

Shammrog
06-05-2008, 10:03 AM
So are we sure that the NBA rep weight is 185lbs? I am totally shocked that what most people consider the best athletes in the world(professional basketball players) aren't any stronger. We have high school sophs. that can do 225lbs 25 or more times. Heck, my roomate who weighs about 190 can sit down and bang out 22 reps at 185 right now! I'm thinking maybe the weight is 225lbs.

I am a big follower of all manner of physical testing and measurements - in short, a geek. I can verify that the weight used by the NBA is 185. NFL is 225, and NHL is 150.

I too am a little surprised at the numbers. But, a. a hs soph who could do 25 reps at 225 would be an *EXTREME* rarity. Even at the NFL combine this would be a superb number.

Still, the level of strength at the NBA combine is lower than one might expect - I myself can do 185 for well over 20 reps (and I am 36!).

Keep in mind though that chest strength is not really an area of emphasis for basketball players. DeMarcus has huge shoulders and arms, but much less so in the chest - as is true with a lot of basketball players.

There is something to be said for the long arms of basketball players being a disadvantage to benching; I think this is overhyped, as longer arms give you a bigger area on which to pack muscle, and a lot of the strongest men in the world are in the 6'4" to 6'6" range.

One other area of note is the testing itself - high reps can give you some idea of maximum strength, but this breaks down a bit after about 12 reps - since you then start testing muscular endurance at a given weight, supplanting the testing of maximum strength.

LetItBD08
06-05-2008, 10:15 AM
Remember that last year the fact that Kevin Durant couldn't bench 185 was big news coming from the pre-draft camp.

"According to the Times, Durant was the only prospect at camp who failed to bench press 185 pounds"

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/draft2007/news/story?id=2894925

MHTorringjan
06-05-2008, 10:23 AM
As far as your Wheaties go, 3 games is of no significant sample size as far as free throws are concerned.

While the point is well-taken that n=3 is generally pretty small, I'm still convinced that it's an improvement over his performances during most of his career. And for 3 games in a row? Point is, I'm impressed just because of how many times I cringed with him going to the FT line the past two years.

M.H.

unexpected
06-05-2008, 10:24 AM
So are we sure that the NBA rep weight is 185lbs? I am totally shocked that what most people consider the best athletes in the world(professional basketball players) aren't any stronger. We have high school sophs. that can do 225lbs 25 or more times. Heck, my roomate who weighs about 190 can sit down and bang out 22 reps at 185 right now! I'm thinking maybe the weight is 225lbs.

no, the weight is 185 lbs. The numbers are lower b/c a good basketball players arms are a lot longer, thus making the bench harder. Also, basketball favors players with with serious speed vs. serious strength.

Kevin Durant last year could barely do one. Al Jefferson did about four the year he was drafted.

SilkyJ
06-05-2008, 12:47 PM
Combine Results
http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=CombineResults-080603

Again, only for insiders, but since there seemed to be confusion as to whether the draftexpress #'s were entirely accurate (Seems to be fixed now) thought I'd throw 'em up.

While the updated the combine results to included everyone at the camp, they still only have height/weight/reach/etc. measurements for the top 15-20 players...

Saratoga2
06-05-2008, 06:50 PM
no, the weight is 185 lbs. The numbers are lower b/c a good basketball players arms are a lot longer, thus making the bench harder. Also, basketball favors players with with serious speed vs. serious strength.

Kevin Durant last year could barely do one. Al Jefferson did about four the year he was drafted.

I was once told that you get better at a sport by practicing at that sport, especially when you are young. Having a high level of fitness is a good thing, but the basketball is handled very nicely by a guy like Kevin Durant and it doesn't seem to matter that he can't bench press 185# a lot of times.

SilkyJ
06-05-2008, 07:06 PM
I was once told that you get better at a sport by practicing at that sport, especially when you are young. Having a high level of fitness is a good thing, but the basketball is handled very nicely by a guy like Kevin Durant and it doesn't seem to matter that he can't bench press 185# a lot of times.

are you serious? its a measure of strength. do you think strength is irrelevant?

strength matters b/c basketball can be physical. at a minimum, an example is for big men: boxing out requires strength (among other things). otherwise you get moved out of your spot by someone stronger and you don't get rebounds. another example would be the ability to draw contact in the lane still finish. that requires strength and balance.

bhd28
06-05-2008, 10:12 PM
are you serious? its a measure of strength. do you think strength is irrelevant?

strength matters b/c basketball can be physical. at a minimum, an example is for big men: boxing out requires strength (among other things). otherwise you get moved out of your spot by someone stronger and you don't get rebounds. another example would be the ability to draw contact in the lane still finish. that requires strength and balance.

Can you bench 185lbs? Are you better at rebounding or finishing with contact than Durant? I am betting yes on #1 and no on #2. I think what he meant was that there are other things (rather than the bench press) that Durant does that are a lot more important to success at b-ball than how much he bench presses. Is strength important? Sure... but the bench press is likely a fairly poor indicator of the type of strength required for NBA success. It just happens to be the type they choose to measure (why they chose the bp, I have no idea... makes some sense in football, where linemen and even RBs use that type of motion a lot, but I would think a squat and a clean and press would be much better measures of functional strength for any sport. Whatever... for some antiquated reason, everyone is too focused on the bench).

ForeverBlowingBubbles
06-06-2008, 07:22 AM
http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Orlando-Recap-Second-Team-All-NBA-Pre-Draft--2916/


Draft Express put Nelson on its 2nd team for stand outs in Orlando...

Cali-Duke
06-06-2008, 01:50 PM
According to this ESPN article by Chad Ford, height isn't so much of a big deal as standing reach and wingspan.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftNotes-080606&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftNotes-080606


In that case, Demarc's height won't be as big of a deal since his standing reach/wingspan are absurd.

Shammrog
06-06-2008, 01:59 PM
According to this ESPN article by Chad Ford, height isn't so much of a big deal as standing reach and wingspan.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftNotes-080606&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftNotes-080606


In that case, Demarc's height won't be as big of a deal since his standing reach/wingspan are absurd.

Actually, his standing reach isn't as high as I would have thought. Turns out a lot of things go into play with that - neck length, shoulder width, etc. Same reason that Shelden, even with absurdly long arms, had a standing reach of only 8'8" (short for a PF). Markie's was only 8'2 1/2 - not much more than guys like Jason Williams and Chris Duhon IIRC.

Elton Brand had a standing reach of 9'2", though. Wow.

CDu
06-06-2008, 02:05 PM
According to this ESPN article by Chad Ford, height isn't so much of a big deal as standing reach and wingspan.

http://insider.espn.go.com/nba/draft2008/insider/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=DraftNotes-080606&action=login&appRedirect=http%3a%2f%2finsider.espn.go.com%2fnba %2fdraft2008%2finsider%2fcolumns%2fstory%3fcolumni st%3dford_chad%26page%3dDraftNotes-080606


In that case, Demarc's height won't be as big of a deal since his standing reach/wingspan are absurd.

A slight clarification: Nelson's wingspan is absurd, but his standing reach is not. Typical standing reach for a SG in the NBA is around 8'5 or 8'6". For Nelson, it's 8'2.5". So he's 3-4 inches undersized, even with the absurd wingspan. Nelson's standing reach is in line with those guys at the PG position.

Shammrog
06-06-2008, 02:11 PM
A slight clarification: Nelson's wingspan is absurd, but his standing reach is not. Typical standing reach for a SG in the NBA is around 8'5 or 8'6". For Nelson, it's 8'2.5". So he's 3-4 inches undersized, even with the absurd wingspan. Nelson's standing reach is in line with those guys at the PG position.

(HAHA! Look one post up; I beat you to it! :))

(It is nice to see people who are interested in the same kind of geeky stuff I am!)

CDu
06-06-2008, 02:18 PM
(HAHA! Look one post up; I beat you to it! :))

(It is nice to see people who are interested in the same kind of geeky stuff I am!)

Dang, I'm just a bit too slow!

Jumbo
06-07-2008, 02:38 AM
are you serious? its a measure of strength. do you think strength is irrelevant?

strength matters b/c basketball can be physical. at a minimum, an example is for big men: boxing out requires strength (among other things). otherwise you get moved out of your spot by someone stronger and you don't get rebounds. another example would be the ability to draw contact in the lane still finish. that requires strength and balance.

Yes, I think he's serious. Benching is just one measure of strength, and it doesn't emphasize basketball-specific muscles, especially for a player like Durant. A number of posters have already mentioned (correctly) that long, lean guys tend to struggle in the bench press because their arms are so long. Guards do better. Strength is certainly important in basketball, but the type of upper body training is much different than for, say, an offensive lineman. Flexibility is really, really important.