# A conspiracy theory, most of you will hate.



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

> The wild cards in the top half of the draft are international forward Andrea Bargnani and Duke forward Shelden Williams. Sources said that Williams has pulled out of scheduled workouts with teams in the second half of the top 10 - including Minnesota, which picks sixth - indicating that a team in the top five has made a commitment to Williams that it will take him.
> 
> Bargnani has been rumored to be Toronto's choice with the top pick, but many teams think that's a smoke screen. They believe that the Raptors don't want to take Bargnani with the first selection. The Raptors would have to convince skeptics who wonder whether Bargnani is ready to play right now - a group that includes Toronto's own all-star forward, Chris Bosh.


Philly Inquirer, David Aldridge.

Theory:

BC knows he IS going to trade down to the 3-5 slot. Bargnani is a smokescreen based on all the BS from scouting trips to the ast. GM link. BC knows Shelden Williams is his guy, so through Papa and coach K lets Shelden know he should not workout with anyone wasting his time beyond 5. This keeps other teams from realising he is worth a top pick and trading up to get him. At 5 he is still a "reach" this way. At the time Marion was a "reach" for BC.

Ah, I like my Conspiracy theories.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

If colangelo likes it....I like it


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

If BC is a mastermind that can pull of this type of thing, why won't he use his powers to hustle Tiago out of Spain?

I'll always think Splitter will be a better NBA player than Williams, until I'm proved wrong, but Sheldon in the right behind him in terms of draft wishes. For the same reasons too. If we ended up with Williams and significant added value, I wouldn't be unhappy.


----------



## speedythief (Jul 16, 2003)

If Bargnani is a smokescreen, the only way it makes sense is if we think Portland wants him and would be willing to trade up to make sure they get him. I don't see another team in the top-whatever, excluding possibly Atlanta (who need a point guard more, but who knows what they'll do) willing to give up an asset to move up if they think Toronto wants Bargnani.

Question is what is Bryan trying to squeeze out of Portland? A point guard?


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

shookem said:


> If BC is a mastermind that can pull of this type of thing, why won't he use his powers to hustle Tiago out of Spain?


His 'powers' can't change the buyout clause written into his contract.

Splitter's numbers have been less than stellar in the Playoffs


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

Flush said:


> His 'powers' can't change the buyout clause written into his contract.
> 
> Splitter's numbers have been less than stellar in the Playoffs


They have and the buyout is an issue, but not to the point the BC hasn't mentioned Ukic's name, same team and not too different contractual situations.


----------



## shookem (Nov 1, 2005)

speedythief said:


> If Bargnani is a smokescreen, the only way it makes sense is if we think Portland wants him and would be willing to trade up to make sure they get him. I don't see another team in the top-whatever, excluding possibly Atlanta (who need a point guard more, but who knows what they'll do) willing to give up an asset to move up if they think Toronto wants Bargnani.
> 
> Question is what is Bryan trying to squeeze out of Portland? A point guard?


I'd say yes, but he already traded Hoffa for a guy of equal inexperience. Unless of course the talk of wanting to get a more experienced lineup was a smokescreen. Or there's more trades to come and this guy looks at the NBA like a chess board.


----------



## chocolove (Apr 4, 2006)

If we were able to trade down to get a pg and be able to draft williams i wouldnt mind that at all. Williams is a beast that can rip your head off and watching a few duke games last year i know he can play basketball too


----------



## GoRaptors (Apr 3, 2005)

There are issues to consider that would make me believe that it is not a commitment fro the Raptors. As it includes the top 5, Atlanta is a possibility as they might realize that adding another finesse small forward would not be particularly beneficial too them. Chicago might also be interested as they seem to like players from Duke and they could use an aggressive power forward/centre. I believe Bryan Colangelo stated that there is not a point guard or centre in the draft that can be a very significant contributor. 

as far as the quote
Bargnani has been rumored to be Toronto's choice with the top pick, but many teams think that's a smoke screen. They believe that the Raptors don't want to take Bargnani with the first selection. The Raptors would have to convince skeptics who wonder whether Bargnani is ready to play right now - a group that includes Toronto's own all-star forward, Chris Bosh. 

Just because otheres feel that Bargnani will not be selected by the Raptors with the first selection, it does not mean that he would not be drafted at a later spot by Toronto.

The issue of convincing skeptics including Bosh that Bargnani would be ready to contribute right now is a bit scary. This situation is alleviated a bit if there is a trade down to get Bargnani as he would not have the status of a no. 1 overall selection.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

shookem said:


> They have and the buyout is an issue, but not to the point the BC hasn't mentioned Ukic's name, same team and not too different contractual situations.


We're slightly off track here but I'll explain quickly.

I don't really understand your post, but I'll guess; Ukic and Splitter are actually in * very different *
situations. 

Colangelo is apparantly discussing Ukic coming over next season, but his discussions are with Ukic's camp not Tau. 

An NBA team can only pay 500, 000 of a players buy out and the player must pay the rest. Ukic was drafted in the second round so he does not have a contract, the team and player must negotiate a contract and its parameters. Therefore Ukic and the Raptors can negotiate a larger contract that incorporates the European buyout.

Splitter, would likely be drafted in the first round. Players drafted in the first round have a prearranged contract based on their draft position. As it stands it does not appear that Splitter would have been drafted high enough to compensate for the money he would have to pay for his buyout.

And as far as I can figure the details of their Buyouts are very different.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

The reason behind this in my view is that SW has been solidly in the 8-10 range for the last 2-3 weeks in terms of where guys are going. 

Charlie was a "reach". Hoffa was a "reach". Both to different effects. The mocks are an idea but are often wrong by miles in slots.

Point is that to take the power away from those teams 6-10, you don't let them have a shot at realising they might want to trade up to 2 or 3 to get him. You can't control a trade ahead after you traded down.

Plus there are ways of making it seem that a promise came from elsewhere, IE Atlanta. There are no real PGs of note and the don't need swings. ATL is a perfect scapegoat for such a "promise".


----------



## narrator (Feb 11, 2006)

Flush said:


> If colangelo likes it....I like it


Can Colangelo spin straw into gold, too? Because that would be awesome.

Everything is a smokescreen. It's the nature of the beast.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Flush said:


> We're slightly off track here but I'll explain quickly.
> 
> I don't really understand your post, but I'll guess; Ukic and Splitter are actually in * very different *
> situations.
> ...


All that and Splitter is not that great of a player. How many times has he taken his name out now?


----------



## cv3bandwagon (Mar 16, 2006)

Personaly I think the Sheldon Williams deal has nothing to do with us. Atanta has shown interest in him and his guarantee in the top five is Atl at 5.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

cv3bandwagon said:


> Personaly I think the Sheldon Williams deal has nothing to do with us. Atanta has shown interest in him and his guarantee in the top five is Atl at 5.


Interesting. Because SW himself has not even worked out for them.

http://draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1336

Scroll to the bottom.

And I KNOW ATL does not have the connections to Duke that BC has.


----------



## cv3bandwagon (Mar 16, 2006)

Well he has yet to work out for the raptors either.......


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

cv3bandwagon said:


> Well he has yet to work out for the raptors either.......


Yes. But if BC knew he were his guy. And he has the pipeline to know everything about his game, demonstrated or not at Duke, BC does not need to work him out.

This is my conspiracy. If you take it at face value then you just think the promise is ATL and that's fine.

I've been the one touting SW's game beyond the scouting report because I've watched him more than anyone on the board. I also know that there is even more there than I've seen that only coach K and his staff knows. We ALL know that MK has a relationship with JC in PHX who now has no real loyalty to anyone but family now that Sarver has taken over. With all the problems TOR has up front, MK is the man to know if SW can do it, and BC has a better chance to know the truth about that than anyone.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

BUTR

how do you feel about Sheldon measuring 6'7 3/4"?


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Flush said:


> BUTR
> 
> how do you feel about Sheldon measuring 6'7 3/4"?



I addressed that in many other threads across bbb.net. They play in shoes, and he said he is a shade under 6-9 in those. I don't care ballers ball. In this day and age, pure height does not matter. 


I would have put him in as my starting 5 6 months ago and I'll put him there now at whatever that barefoot number is. I could have told anyone that would have been the number. He is 6-9 in shoes. Everone is listed in the AA or A in their shoe height. take 1-2" away and you have barefoot height.

If anything, BC has proven he does not care about "typical" centres.


----------



## Ballyhoo (May 30, 2003)

http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060611/SPORTS/606110346/1002

Aldridge: 8 bench presses of 185 lbs
Sheldon: 25 presses of 185 lbs


----------



## ATLien (Jun 18, 2002)

There are conspiracy theories, and then there are conspiracy theories. THAT is a conspiracy theory. I like it.


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

Me too. That's interesting. I like this theory. You could have a basic (and probably at this moment, flawed) depth chart of:
Telfair (or Jack)/Calderon
MoPete/Graham
CV3/Graham
Bosh/CV3/Bonner
Williams/Bosh

That would be a solid team.


----------



## PersianPlaya18 (Jan 1, 2006)

^^agreed....except it almost certainly won't be Telfair.


----------



## The Mad Viking (Jun 12, 2003)

And hiring Benetton Treviso's GM was all part of the "smokescreen"?

:laugh:


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

Ballyhoo said:


> http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060611/SPORTS/606110346/1002
> 
> Aldridge: 8 bench presses of 185 lbs
> Sheldon: 25 presses of 185 lbs


long arms cant bench as much as short ones, its already known. id take that with a grain of salt. compare their wing spans instead.


----------



## cv3bandwagon (Mar 16, 2006)

l2owen said:


> long arms cant bench as much as short ones, its already known. id take that with a grain of salt. compare their wing spans instead.


Well seeing how Sheldon has a freakish 7'4 wingspan, that's quite amazing. Actually I think Lamarcus has the *shorte*r wingspan then Sheldon.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

The Mad Viking said:


> And hiring Benetton Treviso's GM was all part of the "smokescreen"?
> 
> :laugh:


No. The fact that it makes people think that Bargnani is the only pick for the Raps BECAUSE Gherardini was hired as Ast. GM is an aid to a smokescreen. They did not hire him for a smokescreen.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

l2owen said:


> long arms cant bench as much as short ones, its already known. id take that with a grain of salt. compare their wing spans instead.



I'll take that. Shelden is pretty long, and 25 to 8 is not exactly 25 to 18 if you were to use that argument. You realise he has long arms right, that's one of the reasons he had 3.8 blks a game.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

blowuptheraptors said:


> I'll take that. Shelden is pretty long, and 25 to 8 is not exactly 25 to 18 if you were to use that argument. You realise he has long arms right, that's one of the reasons he had 3.8 blks a game.


hes got long arms true. but you have to take into account the whole proportion of the guys size. guys with broader shoulders can have shorter arms but can measure the same length as guys who have narrow shoulders but longer arms. besides a bench press is not indicative of how good a center is gonna play . hoffa lifted the most of any at the rookie combines , and that didnt really do him any good. either way it doesnt really matter how much a guy can press . whats more important for blocking is standing reach .


----------



## TRON (Feb 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by *blowuptheraptors !*
> 
> Theory:
> 
> BC knows he IS going to trade down to the 3-5 slot. Bargnani is a smokescreen based on all the BS from scouting trips to the ast. GM link. BC knows Shelden Williams is his guy, so through Papa and coach K lets Shelden know he should not workout with anyone wasting his time beyond 5. This keeps other teams from realising he is worth a top pick and trading up to get him. At 5 he is still a "reach" this way. At the time Marion was a "reach" for BC.


I genuwinely believe that Collangelo really likes Barganani and he might have been our pick if we remained at #5, but now it's all up in the air. 

It would be interesting if Sheldon went higher than a lot of mocks have him, but the conspiricy that I thought up when the Atlanta praise can out, was that Atlanta was shaking out the teams in the 9-12 area that might be high on Sheldon as well, so they could trade down and get the PG they need.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

l2owen said:


> hes got long arms true. but you have to take into account the whole proportion of the guys size. guys with broader shoulders can have shorter arms but can measure the same length as guys who have narrow shoulders but longer arms. besides a bench press is not indicative of how good a center is gonna play . hoffa lifted the most of any at the rookie combines , and that didnt really do him any good. either way it doesnt really matter how much a guy can press . whats more important for blocking is standing reach .


No. It is a very good indication of strength, as it is a STRENGTH test. Why do all NFL prospects get similar tests. My Eagles drafted a DT that benched 225 40+ times.

Think that had no impact on their decision? Who's going to win a rebound battle LA v. SW. I'll put my cash on SW EVERY last time.

And Hoffa is a T-Rex, short-*** arms, small hands. Big diff.

And I haven't seen too many blocks in any league from standing reach.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

TRON said:


> I genuwinely believe that Collangelo really likes Barganani and he might have been our pick if we remained at #5, but now it's all up in the air.
> 
> It would be interesting if Sheldon went higher than a lot of mocks have him, but the conspiricy that I thought up when the Atlanta praise can out, was that Atlanta was shaking out the teams in the 9-12 area that might be high on Sheldon as well, so they could trade down and get the PG they need.


Very plausible explanation. Very well could be.


----------



## ballocks (May 15, 2003)

imo, the arguments against shelden williams remain generally unfair. in the same way, i think presenting evidence like the man's superior results on the bench press is irrelevant. "short/long arms", "short/long wingspan", "short body", "muscular frame", "gym trainer", "smelly feet", etc. are all nice offseason subjects, but they don't make him any better or worse of a basketball player. i think we all know this, it's just not as interesting. i guess we need to something to talk about; and i guess that's fine.

but to suggest that shelden williams will have an especially tough time defending nba players because he's 6'7.75'' barefoot is weak. the man can play defense with whatever frame he's been given- can anyone name a single major college player (regardless of era) who was a definitive fly swatter in the ncaa and went on to a mediocre defensive career in the pros? it just doesn't happen all that often- if ever. you play the way you are. yeah, we can talk about "size" and "reps" and all that other stuff if we're looking for an opinion in june, but players like shelden have already played enough winter basketball to render those thoughts irrelevant. we've seen him, we know what he can and can't do. the fact that he's just under 6'8" coming out of the shower doesn't really matter unless you _want_ it to matter (i.e. don't want to pick him).

likewise, the fact that he can triple lamarcus' numbers in the gym doesn't matter either. we know he's stronger- i mean, have we not seen lamarcus aldridge already? the guy's a toothpick at this stage, but you still don't see him being bullied regularly by anyone of any size from any school. that would not be my critique of his game. if anyone's been bullied by an opponent with a bigger frame, i'd suggest it was probably shelden by sean may on a couple of occasions- although they happened a long time ago, and "bullied" might be the wrong description anyway.

to me, unless you're a diminutive point guard (and exceptions exist even there), body type doesn't make a significant difference in the transition between college and the pros. you find a way to cope, just like you have to date. i hope we don't make our decision on the basis of only that criteria- there are more important factors, imo. just like with rudy gay: people seem to adore him again, "the offseason wonder". yeah, he's gravity-defying and has been known to tango on top of the backboard from time to time, but basketball is the paramount issue here. a player like him, imo, took virtually zero steps this season towards making additional use of that great skill- watch a huskies game from last year, then this year. has he changed... at all? things like _that_ would raise a red flag in my world, not whether he's 6'9" and can leg press a mountain.

in terms of the conspiracy, it's interesting but i don't think i buy it. one of the main reasons i'm enjoying our draft position this year is for stories like this, but i'm not one to be swayed. i don't think bryan colangelo has made up his mind at all, on anyone, i think there are too many decision makers to hear from (and decisions to be made) and i sincerely doubt that he's heard from enough of them to guarantee shelden or anybody his selection in the top 5. i just don't think shelden has a guarantee at all (that's my theory!). we've seen these games many times before, especially in the nba, and players/agents have been known to use 'guarantees' to market themselves better. i think it does work but... i think it's also too early to be real in this case.

but on the point of guarantees in general, i think we should probably acknowledge that they don't happen as often as we'd like to think. i mean, i don't blame anyone for talking about them- after all, we can't stop hearing about players "looking for guarantees in the first!"- but they are risky propositions to which no team is bound. if anything, i think players are told by suitors that they're certainly in demand, but to go to the full length of offering a guarantee is not customary. for 29 teams in the draft, there are just far too many factors to hold constant. that said, the exception would most likely be the team holding the first pick, so in terms of shelden williams and toronto it would probably make more sense than normal (imo) but still... time will tell.

t minus 16 days... nice.

peace


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

blowuptheraptors said:


> No. It is a very good indication of strength, as it is a STRENGTH test. Why do all NFL prospects get similar tests. My Eagles drafted a DT that benched 225 40+ times.
> 
> Think that had no impact on their decision? Who's going to win a rebound battle LA v. SW. I'll put my cash on SW EVERY last time.
> 
> ...



NO. what does the NFL have to do with the NBA? those sports require COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PHYSICAL STANDARDS. nfl players carry excess weight to hold the front lines, and their offensive lines are made for speed / short/ quick players. what the hell does football have to do with the nba??? obviously in football youre going to have stronger and shorter players. you cant measure nba players by what football players do LOL . they dont have 7 footers running around playing positions. 

and as for blocks ---> basketball people will tell you standing reach is more important than a wingspan. 

here is even an article talking about standing reach and how more important it is than wingspan. 

http://www.draftexpress.com/viewarticle.php?a=1004

and no i wouldnt put my money on shelden to outrebound LA every single time. i bet you anything ANYTHING that when the rookies meet during their games LA will outrebound SW in at least one of those games. and on the NBA season i bet LA will average more rebounds than SW.


and obviously you wont see blocks from standing reach . standing reach plays an important role in all areas of the game, and its also most important when you have your feet planted and are playing defense without leaving the ground. you ever watch interior post defense players with their arms straight up guarding shots? thats standing reach for you right there. when you shoot the ball. you arent using your wingspan, youre not shooting the ball from your side. you raise your arms to shoot the ball, standing reach again . standing reach is VERY important.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

l2owen said:


> NO. what does the NFL have to do with the NBA? those sports require COMPLETELY DIFFERENT PHYSICAL STANDARDS. nfl players carry excess weight to hold the front lines, and their offensive lines are made for speed / short/ quick players. what the hell does football have to do with the nba??? obviously in football youre going to have stronger and shorter players. you cant measure nba players by what football players do LOL . they dont have 7 footers running around playing positions.


Are you saying that the Bench press is not a good test for strength as it applies to basketball?

IMO the bench press translates better to basketball than football. Especially post players. Football players usually only use their upperbody strength to finish moves. Sometimes they use it to straight arm etc but how rare is that.

Basketball players use their upperbody strength in the post almost exclusively. In the post players use their arms by pushing a player away from their torso, much the same say you would say...bench press. If a player cannot bench very much weight it becomes much easier to back them down in the post. Not something you want out of a centre prospect. Leg strength factors in here somewhat, but if you are forced to use your legs you must bend your knees....lowering your height. If you are able to use more upper body strength you can stay tall.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

Flush said:


> Are you saying that the Bench press is not a good test for strength as it applies to basketball?
> 
> IMO the bench press translates better to basketball than football. Especially post players. Football players usually only use their upperbody strength to finish moves. Sometimes they use it to straight arm etc but how rare is that.
> 
> Basketball players use their upperbody strength in the post almost exclusively. In the post players use their arms by pushing a player away from their torso, much the same say you would say...bench press. If a player cannot bench very much weight it becomes much easier to back them down in the post. Not something you want out of a centre prospect. Leg strength factors in here somewhat, but if you are forced to use your legs you must bend your knees....lowering your height. If you are able to use more upper body strength you can stay tall.



whoa whoa . only upper body strength in the post?? lower body strength IS VERY important for retaining your position. whats the point of having upper body strength if your feet , your foundation, can easily be displaced? and post defense required "digging in" and holding your position , thats not only upper body strength , thats very heavy legwork. 

and you were saying something about pushing of the torso. well the physics is this. for every action there is a reaction . when you are pushing someone out of the block, that same force is pushing back at you. if you do not have the leg strength to retain your position youre basically pushing yourself. its not just upper body strength, if you want to push someone out of the post you have to have the ability to retain your position and not displace yourself while pushing on the other guy . or when he pushes on you. being able to retain your position and holding off that upper body force is all in the leverage /grip/strength/ of your lower body and its ability to hold off that push . 

example ====> stand totally straight next to a wall and push it with an arm , extended fully. you'll just flop down because you have nothing to support yourself, you arent using your lower body whatsoever . 

now put one of your feet back and then push the wall . notice the tension in your lower body muscles that are working to maintain that position and displace the force that is pushing you back ( which is you pushing against the wall , which is pushing you back ) 


thats just a very dumbbed down example of how lower body strength is important in holding position. legs are VERY VERY important for post players.


----------



## Team Mao (Dec 17, 2005)

Interesting arguments from everyone but hasn't it been obvious for a long time that Shelden Williams is much stronger than LaMarcus Aldridge? Aldridge fans can come up with all the excuses they want, but the simple fact is that they guy is going to get abused by stronger post players in the league.

His comments in a recent DX interview about it not being important to bulk up make it seem like he either seems himself as a PF or that he's just dumb. I'm hoping it's the first of the two.

Is bench press the best test for NBA players? Probably not. I'd like to see them do a squat test as well to test lower body core strength. My guess would be that guys who do well on the bench would also do well on the squat because most strong players are strong all around. You don't see a lot of guys in the league with big upperbodies on stick legs or vice-versa.

In terms of upper body strength helping, I think it's helpful in finishing down low, fighting for boards and durability in the post- when a big guy is backing you down, you need a strong upperbody core to keep from getting beat up.


----------



## billfindlay10 (Jan 24, 2003)

I think that the upper body strength comes into play when you have a 50/50 rebound. Two guys are going to battle with neither player having the "box out" advantage, the player who has the ability to hold off the other by use of a forearm and then come down with the board with a free hand is at an advantage...this takes very good upper body strength and can result in one or two more rebounds per game.

That being said, core strength is the overall most important factor in my book....but a well
conditioned player (physical) will have a solid core as well as upper and lower body strength


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

^^ agreed. my point is that you cant overlook lower body strength and say its not important in the post like flush was saying . it is very important to have a strong foundation, but like you guys said usually if hes strong up there he will be strong in the legs too . core strength is important..but to say the most important thing for post players is upper body ... its not true at all . and yeah when holding off /pushing other players again , your foundation , your feet/legs, play a very important role in letting you maintain your position and pushing someone else off of theirs. also the speed at which you are able to reach the ball , if you can elevate faster and quicker than the other guy , if your reach is longer.. all these things play an important role in a post players ability to rebound . 

point is that bench press are not a good way to measure how good a player will be in the post, there are a lot of different factors that come into play. you dont have to bench a crapload to be an athletic beast. benching is not a good way to measure post potential . for example one of shawn marions strengths as a rebounder is how insanely fast he gets off the ground . hes just amazing. combine that with his amazing vertical and the guy is up and above his competition before they can react. his refelxes are fantastic. this is just another example of how you dont need to be an uber buffed up power body to get rebounds. even though marion is no slouch himself, hes built like a rock .


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

l2owen said:


> example ====> stand totally straight next to a wall and push it with an arm , extended fully. you'll just flop down because you have nothing to support yourself, you arent using your lower body whatsoever .


You are only re-enforcing my point. The more leg strength required you must BEND your legs...thus lowering your overall height.

Someone who has a strong upper body does not need to bend their legs as much inorder to create outward force. Thus they stand much taller. 

Watch people gaurding shaq 1on1 in the post they are often leaning and bending to the point that they loose 8-12 inches just to create enough force to prevent being backed down. Shaq will often tower over 7 footers in this instance, and get off easy hooks or power over them for dunks. 

Aldridge is much taller than williams. but in 1 to 1 post defense LA will need to compensate for a lack of upper body strength by bending and leaning. SW will retain more of his natural height by standing taller and using his strength.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

l2owen said:


> ^^ agreed. my point is that you cant overlook lower body strength and say its not important in the post like flush was saying . it is very important to have a strong foundation, but like you guys said usually if hes strong up there he will be strong in the legs too . core strength is important..but to say the most important thing for post players is upper body ... its not true at all .



Where did I say it wasn't important? I didn't say that at all.

The more you rely on lower body the shorter you become, thus negating length.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

Flush said:


> Where did I say it wasn't important? I didn't say that at all.
> 
> The more you rely on lower body the shorter you become, thus negating length.



you said leg factors in "somewhat".. its a lot more than somewhat.. thats downplaying a very vital aspect of post play . good footwork and strong legs are very very important for post players. not "somewhat" it just seemed like you were downplaying leg strength in favor of bench presses.....sorry if i misunderstood.


----------



## Flush (Jul 25, 2005)

l2owen said:


> you said leg factors in "somewhat".. its a lot more than somewhat.. thats downplaying a very vital aspect of post play . good footwork and strong legs are very very important for post players. not "somewhat" it just seemed like you were downplaying leg strength in favor of bench presses.....sorry if i misunderstood.



The point is the bench press can be a very effective piece of information in evaluating a players ability to defend in the post. It is hardly the only piece of info required, but it helps when looking at the whole package.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

and when you talk about negating length thats exactly where standing reach plays an important role. a big wingspan doesnt guarantee a long standing reach when youre putting up those arms to play defense. some players have insane / same wingspans, butwhen you do standing reach one may be 5 or even more inches shorter than the other! thats a huge huge difference. 

like for example both hakeem warrick and granger had the same wingspan , but warricks standing reach was 5 inches higher than grangers. and the one thing about bending knees, is that your legs will have to bend / work more when YOUR UPPER BODY IS STRONGER . the stronger force your upper body is exerting on the opposing player , the more force your legs have to counter in order to maintain their position. this as well as the opponent backing and pushing you down . unless your opponent is very weak and you can easily push him out of the way . look at how defenders have to play vs shaq, closely watch how their feet are planted. they extend one of their legs in a " / " position , ( thing of a log that supports something heavy ) and the other leg is bent in . this is a "dig down " kind of position where you are using your leg strength and positioning as a prop against the force being exerted on you . with one arm up defending the shot and the other on shaqs torso .


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Wow, all I can say is that your arguments are poorly based. WTF would scouts and the NBA camps put players through a test if it means nothing? I mean seriously. If you want the Raps to draft Aldridge, just say it, but to try and twist things to make the discrepancy mean less is just makes your view very transparent.

Bottom line, competeting against tougher competition and head to head, SW smoked LA.


----------



## SkywalkerAC (Sep 20, 2002)

l2owen said:


> hes got long arms true. but you have to take into account the whole proportion of the guys size. guys with broader shoulders can have shorter arms but can measure the same length as guys who have narrow shoulders but longer arms. besides a bench press is not indicative of how good a center is gonna play . hoffa lifted the most of any at the rookie combines , and that didnt really do him any good. either way it doesnt really matter how much a guy can press . whats more important for blocking is standing reach .


Hoffa didn't participate in the Chicago pre-draft so he never did the bench press test.

And Sheldon's standing reach is going to be mighty high. It isn't exactly his mind-boggling vertical leap that is blocking all those shots. And he's strong through and through, top to bottom.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

blowuptheraptors said:


> Wow, all I can say is that your arguments are poorly based. WTF would scouts and the NBA camps put players through a test if it means nothing? I mean seriously. If you want the Raps to draft Aldridge, just say it, but to try and twist things to make the discrepancy mean less is just makes your view very transparent.



WOW . this from a guy who has a shelden sig?? if you want the raps to draft Shelden just say it , but dont try and twist things to make it seem like a bench press is going to determine who is a better player. it makes YOUR view very transparent. 

and NO i DO NOT want LA on this team . my argument is that that using a single bench press measurement to determine how a player will succeed in the nba is pointless. ive been on the Adam bandwagon for more than a year now bro .


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

SkywalkerAC said:


> Hoffa didn't participate in the Chicago pre-draft so he never did the bench press test.
> 
> And Sheldon's standing reach is going to be mighty high. It isn't exactly his mind-boggling vertical leap that is blocking all those shots. And he's strong through and through, top to bottom.


im pretty sure he did.. i heard he benched the most out of anyone? something like 300 pounds... its out there somewhere, it may not have been chicago but word of him being the highest bencher of the class did come out of somewhere.


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

l2owen said:


> WOW . this from a guy who has a shelden sig?? if you want the raps to draft Shelden just say it , but dont try and twist things to make it seem like a bench press is going to determine who is a better player. it makes YOUR view very transparent.
> 
> and NO i DO NOT want LA on this team . my argument is that that using a single bench press measurement to determine how a player will succeed in the nba is pointless. ive been on the Adam bandwagon for more than a year now bro .


I already have said it. Where have you been? It's in my frigin sig for god's sake. It's my avatar. It's above my avatar.

I never did say it makes him a better player, but it is one measure than explains why he is better suited to be a very good rebounder at the next level.


----------



## l2owen (Apr 24, 2006)

blowuptheraptors said:


> I already have said it. Where have you been? It's in my frigin sig for god's sake. It's my avatar. It's above my avatar.
> 
> I never did say it makes him a better player, but it is one measure than explains why he is better suited to be a very good rebounder at the next level.


ok we can all agree strength is important to be a good rebounder. obviously you need to be strong to bang with the big boys mos def. but dont discount a player only because he cant bench as much as another one in the post. there are way too many x factors invovled. things like heart, agility , IQ, core strength , lower body strength, iq tests.. i mean there is a psychological test and if LA scores higher than SW does that mean hes better suited to be at the next level? using stats is walking on a very grey and shady area. some things cant be measured, others can , some measurements may be more important than others while other measurements that dont seem like they are important actually are. i hope SW and LA both have success but , i just cant agree that a bench press is gonna make or break how good a player will rebound. its in the heart, its in the mind, and its in the body .. all three have to be sharp.


----------



## Benis007 (May 23, 2005)

Flush said:


> If colangelo likes it....I like it


i agree 100%.

leave it to the pro's. I'm a fat guy that sat on the bench in high school, this guy has built a winner before.

he knows what he is doing. :cheers:


----------



## butr (Mar 23, 2004)

Papers are for fish and chips but hey.



> RAPS LIKE SHELDEN: More than a few weeks ago, I was a proponent of the Raptors, if they had a draft pick around No. 7 or 8, taking a long and hard look at Duke's Shelden Williams.
> 
> Had a chance to talk to Williams on Saturday in Orlando and came way quite impressed. With one problem: Williams swears he's an NBA power forward, with a face up game and good shooting touch rather than a centre who plays with his back to the basket and rebounds and defends and blocks shots.
> 
> ...


Doug Smith

Link 

I wouldn't care what he says about were he sees himself. He can go down low or be outside and he can certainly run on the break.


----------

