# 2009 NBA draft athletic testing results released



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

some interesting stuff here.

james harden with a 37 inch max vert(tied with terrence williams, damian james, and jodie meeks for 7th), the most reps out of any of the guards at the bench, and the 7th best 3/4th court sprint time. so much for him being a bad athlete.

blake griffin was great on the bench and lane agility but unimpressive with his vertical and 3/4 court sprint.

austin daye had the slowest sprint time, 2nd worst lane agility, didn't put up a rep on the bench, and only had a 28 inch vert. i think it could be safe to say he's the worst athlete that was at the combine.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Griffin and Hansbrough looked good on the bench press, particularly Griffin. Kid is strong. Harangody outdid them both, lol at Clark with just 5. 

I mean am not saying Hansbrough is in Griffin's league, but their numbers are quite similar down the board. Someone's going to get a good bargain in Hansbrough, that I know, which is probably contrary to what most say on this board.

I mean am not a big fan of Harden, but its hard to see why he wouldnt go top 10 with those numbers.

Stephen Curry has a better vert than Harden, Henderson and Williams. Noiice!!! Flynn has a 40 inc vert wow!

I prefer nbadraft.net's setup, its in alphabetical order and easier to look at.

http://www.nbadraft.net/node/6301


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Some of those results are curious, especially the verticals. Harden's numbers are going to help him a little for sure.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

rocketeer said:


> some interesting stuff here.
> 
> james harden with a 37 inch max vert(tied with terrence williams, damian james, and jodie meeks for 7th), the most reps out of any of the guards at the bench, and the 7th best 3/4th court sprint time. so much for him being a bad athlete.
> 
> ...



Griffin may have been unimpressive with his vertical but no one in this draft can jump like he can. Some of the Dunks, Rebounds, and Blocks he had last year just left me shaking my head. These combine numbers mean nothing, I have harped on this for a couple of years now but if you need a combine to tell you who's athletic and who's not then :whiteflag:


----------



## pharcyde (Jun 22, 2002)

I refuse to believe there are 14 players with a max vert reach equal to or greater than that of Blake Griffin... not just at this camp, but in college basketball period. That can't be right.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Here are some information about the vertical jump in general and possibilities to cheat if someone is interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vertical_jump


----------



## Coatesvillain (Jul 17, 2002)

rocketeer said:


> some interesting stuff here.
> 
> james harden with a 37 inch max vert(tied with terrence williams, damian james, and jodie meeks for 7th), the most reps out of any of the guards at the bench, and the 7th best 3/4th court sprint time. so much for him being a bad athlete.


It's not much different than the NFL combine in that these numbers don't tell how athletic a person plays. If I remember correctly Luke Jackson tested out really well in these drills and yet that athleticism that showed in tests didn't show in his game at all.

I also remember Kirk Snyder testing out as a better overall athlete than Andre Iguodala, and watching them play that wasn't nearly the case.

Honestly, I think these tests are practically useless (even moreso than in football).


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The only ones I really look at are the sprint and lane agility (especially for guards). Verticals are pointless because Farmar apparently has a higher vertical than Rondo and Lowry and that doesn't up show up in the basketball games that often.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

lulz at Austin Daye. Usually, when teams draft 6-11 bean poles, they're at least more athletic than, say, a manatee. 

This guy's going in the second round.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

I hope the teams do penalize Clark for the bench issue, Durant had the same problem and look how that turned out. I really hope Clark's on the board at 11.


----------



## E.H. Munro (Jun 22, 2004)

HKF said:


> The only ones I really look at are the sprint and lane agility (especially for guards). Verticals are pointless because Farmar apparently has a higher vertical than Rondo and Lowry and that doesn't up show up in the basketball games that often.


Yeah, I was shocked by Jodie Meeks' numbers, because when I watch him play he never looks that athletic. You look at the combine numbers and he's apparently strong with a good vertical, and yet for all that I don't think he's a terribly strong finisher in traffic. Just from the numbers you would expect him to play as athletically as Tony Allen, and he doesn't.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> Yeah, I was shocked by Jodie Meeks' numbers, because when I watch him play he never looks that athletic. You look at the combine numbers and he's apparently strong with a good vertical, and yet for all that I don't think he's a terribly strong finisher in traffic. Just from the numbers you would expect him to play as athletically as Tony Allen, and he doesn't.


The thing is, things like agility tend to bear out during games, but the vertical has to be something that is apart of your game. Like I don't believe Blake Griffin's vertical numbers as in game tells a different story. On another site they were comparing Chris Paul and Kevin Love's scores, but I didn't get that considering that you can't compare power forward numbers to point guards. A bigger person is going to cover more ground in a short-term exercise, but that doesn't mean they have the same speed (when factoring in stamina, acceleration and the like).

Jodie Meeks to me is the lesser version of Jermaine Taylor out of Central Florida. Taylor is only 6'4, but he seems exactly like a Mitch Richmond, Michael Finley clone. Big time scorer, athletic specimen and has the potential to be a lockdown scorer. When I see Meeks, I see Voshon Lenard or JJ Redick. A guy running off screens looking for his shot, but isn't worth much else.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

I don't find it hard to believe that Blake Griffins vert isn't jawdropping. His length and power on his dunks and blocks probably tend to mislead the eye a little. Which is why I sometimes think vert and height are overrated so often. I would much prefer length...


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

bball2223 said:


> Griffin may have been unimpressive with his vertical but no one in this draft can jump like he can. Some of the Dunks, Rebounds, and Blocks he had last year just left me shaking my head. These combine numbers mean nothing, I have harped on this for a couple of years now but if you need a combine to tell you who's athletic and who's not then :whiteflag:


the combine numbers definitely don't mean everything, but they don't mean nothing either. i mean, you definitely aren't drafting a guy based on combine numbers but they can tell you something.

i already didn't like austin daye as a prospect but him testing out as the worst athlete in the draft definitely has to hurt him.

and then you've got a guy like harden where people have consistently said that one of his weaknesses is that he lacked athleticism. sounds like the same things people said about guys like brandon roy and jeff green. the combine basically showed that harden doesn't lack athleticism, his game just doesn't rely on it.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Harden is like Jalen Rose. A 40 inch vert to either is useless.


----------



## sMaK (Jun 13, 2002)

I've seen Harden slam it down on people. He's just passive. To me, that's his biggest knock. I've seen people call him a 'blend player', whatever that means.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Anyone find it odd that AJ Price has the highest body fat percentage in the draft?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

HB said:


> Anyone find it odd that AJ Price has the highest body fat percentage in the draft?


He played less than a year removed from an ACL injury. Not a surprise. I am sure he's working on his conditioning now that he's a year removed from that injury.


----------



## Mr. Hobbes (Jul 1, 2005)

I'm surprised there's only 1.5 inches separating Hansbrough and Griffin's vert.


----------



## umopapisdn (Jun 5, 2009)

Somebody is going to get a good one with Wayne Ellington. Compared to a guy like Gerald Henderson, Ellington is bigger, stronger, more athletic, and one of the best shooters in the draft.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

umopapisdn said:


> Somebody is going to get a good one with Wayne Ellington. Compared to a guy like Gerald Henderson, Ellington is bigger, stronger, more athletic, and one of the best shooters in the draft.


Bigger, stronger and more athletic in which way ?


----------



## umopapisdn (Jun 5, 2009)

croco said:


> Bigger, stronger and more athletic in which way ?


Um... did you even click the measurement links? Ellington is taller, did better on the bench, and had a better vertical (38 inches, good for fifth in this years draft). Bigger, stronger, and more athletic. Not a huge difference, their agility scores were also pretty similar, but it's always funny how mis-truths get accepted as fact. 

For years people have called Henderson an athletic freak with good size, now we find out that he isn't anything incredible athletically and he is even a bit undersized. And people have called Ellington, one of the best shooters in this years draft, too small and too unathletic. And now we find out he is one of the better athletes in the draft and has adequate size. Yet, even debunking those mis-truths with numbers and facts, people still consider a Henderson a lottery pick and Ellington a late 1st at best; solely because those mis-truths still linger in the back of their minds.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Well, whilst Ellington did do well in the combine, their numbers arent that far off. Personally I'd draft both around the same spot, but the NBA and draft sites are usually infatuated with guys who have athletic potential. Ellington isnt a guy who is going to be dunking over anyone, Henderson is. Ellington has improved his game a lot, everything from ball handling to court awareness improved last season, which is why he's going to be a mid to late first round pick.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

umopapisdn said:


> Um... did you even click the measurement links? Ellington is taller, did better on the bench, and had a better vertical (38 inches, good for fifth in this years draft). Bigger, stronger, and more athletic. Not a huge difference, their agility scores were also pretty similar, but it's always funny how mis-truths get accepted as fact.
> 
> For years people have called Henderson an athletic freak with good size, now we find out that he isn't anything incredible athletically and he is even a bit undersized. And people have called Ellington, one of the best shooters in this years draft, too small and too unathletic. And now we find out he is one of the better athletes in the draft and has adequate size. Yet, even debunking those mis-truths with numbers and facts, people still consider a Henderson a lottery pick and Ellington a late 1st at best; solely because those mis-truths still linger in the back of their minds.


Chris Quinn had a higher vertical than Russell Westbrook. Do you consider Quinn the more athletic player ?

Those combine numbers are almost irrelevant, they are a minor indicator at best.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

This is similar to Kevin Love last year. He looked unathletic through college...then popped good numbers at the combine...then looked unathletic in the NBA.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

MemphisX said:


> This is similar to Kevin Love last year. He looked unathletic through college...then popped good numbers at the combine...then looked unathletic in the NBA.


of course he was pretty successful in the nba.


----------



## knickstorm (Jun 22, 2003)

Chan said:


> I'm surprised there's only 1.5 inches separating Hansbrough and Griffin's vert.


standing vert's are useless

i'm sure if you asked them to dunk a ball from 10 feet out.....Griffin's going to get higher, get off the ground faster, and throw it down harder.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

umopapisdn said:


> Um... did you even click the measurement links? Ellington is taller, did better on the bench, and had a better vertical (38 inches, good for fifth in this years draft). Bigger, stronger, and more athletic. Not a huge difference, their agility scores were also pretty similar, but it's always funny how mis-truths get accepted as fact.
> 
> For years people have called Henderson an athletic freak with good size, now we find out that he isn't anything incredible athletically and he is even a bit undersized. And people have called Ellington, one of the best shooters in this years draft, too small and too unathletic. And now we find out he is one of the better athletes in the draft and has adequate size. Yet, even debunking those mis-truths with numbers and facts, people still consider a Henderson a lottery pick and Ellington a late 1st at best; solely because those mis-truths still linger in the back of their minds.


These numbers and measurements don't necessarily translate into on-court athleticism. Although, I do think Ellington is more athletic than he has been given credit for, he is not even close to as athletic as Gerald Henderson. (I'm a Carolina guy by the way). I would describe Ellington as fluid and smooth, moreso than athletic. Gerald Henderson is simply very athletic.


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

croco said:


> Chris Quinn had a higher vertical than Russell Westbrook. Do you consider Quinn the more athletic player ?
> 
> Those combine numbers are almost irrelevant, they are a minor indicator at best.


wow, is this true?

shocking bit of news to me.....


----------

