# 2009 NBA Draft Official Measurements



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Measurements-released-3236/

Kudos to Jordan Hill, Gerald Henderson and Wayne Ellington.


----------



## Priest (Jun 24, 2003)

LMAO I agree with your statement about mayo....man it has to be the shoes...i met wayne ellington before and there isnt any way possible I'm 6''6..crazy how he is taller then evans without shoes but the same height with them on but ##$#@[email protected] at evans wingspan


----------



## bootstrenf (May 24, 2006)

blake griffin......

height without shoes : 6'8.5"
height with shoes : 6'10"
weight : 248 lbs
wingspan : 6'11.25"
standing reach : 8'9"


anyone correct me if i'm wrong, but griffin's measurements aren't impressive at all.....would i be correct in saying that these numbers are very average???



and by the way, any info on their verticals??? standing, one step, peak/optimal......thanks...


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Blair measures out at just 6'7 in shoes, but his wingspan, reach and weight are all _really_ impressive.

Blake Griffin is 6'10 in shoes.

Earl Clark is taller than Blake Griffin and has a 7'2.5 wingspan. mg:

Hansbrough's measurements are much better than I expected.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

bootstrenf said:


> blake griffin......
> 
> height without shoes : 6'8.5"
> height with shoes : 6'10"
> ...


His wingspan and reach don't jump off the charts, but I know a lot of people who wouldn't have expected him to be 6'10 in shoes.

I wouldn't be concerned (unless you want to start a grassroots campaign to take Rubio and let Griffin fall to No. 2 :bsmile: )


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

Watched Griffin's vertical. Have no worries about that dude. He will be smashing lobs on fools for a decade or more. Clippers just need a coach to let Diddy, Gordon, Thornton, and Jordan get out and run. Might be the most athletic 5 in the NBA. Too bad Jordan and Thornton might be sharing a brain.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

The numbers are better almost across the board than I expected, unlike last year. 

Blair weighing in at 277 pounds and he has lost 10-15 since the end of the season mg:

Some other observations:

- Jonny Flynn has 30 pounds on Darren Collison, weighs the same as Lawson
- Austin Daye is really, really small
- Hansbrough taller than estimated
- Earl Clark will be a Top 10 pick


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Its funny whenever I said Hansbrough was 6'9, youse guys on here always said otherwise, guess I am probably the only one who isn't shocked by the measurements. He's a legit first rounder, which bodes well for Deon Thompson next year, he's gotta be taller than Tyler. Blake is 6'10 in shoes, that bodes well for him too.

LOL Lawson and Blair are midgets. Clark's numbers are mighty impressive. I think Ellington gets in the first round now.


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

Austin Daye weighs less than Ty Lawson. :|


----------



## TM (Jun 30, 2003)

bootstrenf said:


> anyone correct me if i'm wrong, but griffin's measurements aren't impressive at all.....would i be correct in saying that these numbers are very average???


maybe, but who cares when you can out-run and/or out-jump most of the guys you're going up against. the athleticism is what puts him heads and shoulders above everyone.

GH in at 6'4". HB, go edit your post. Didn't you call him only 6'3" or something like that?


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Hansbrough is 6'9? I am literally stunned. It still won't matter, but these measurements do surprise me. Blair is only 6'6. Even with his wingspan, he's gonna have to drop a lot more weight for me to want to draft him in the lottery. James Johnson is strictly a power 3.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

TM said:


> maybe, but who cares when you can out-run and/or out-jump most of the guys you're going up against. the athleticism is what puts him heads and shoulders above everyone.
> 
> GH in at 6'4". HB, go edit your post. Didn't you call him only 6'3" or something like that?


I did, too. :makeadeal


----------



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

Cinco de Mayo said:


> His wingspan and reach don't jump off the charts, but I know a lot of people who wouldn't have expected him to be 6'10 in shoes.
> 
> I wouldn't be concerned (unless you want to start a grassroots campaign to take Rubio and let Griffin fall to No. 2 :bsmile: )


We're talking about the Clippers here, they're destined to screw this up and trade the pick. I expect that's why the Pilsbury Draftboy (aka Chris Wallace) is playing chicken, so that the deal goes through Memphis. Rudy Gay & Rubio for Griffin?


----------



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

I'm sorry, there's simply no way that Hansbrough is 6'10" in shoes. Did he pay the scout to mismeasure him or something?


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

He is 6'10 cause when he stands next to taller players, he measures up kindly. I mean I always thought the Hansbrough is 6'6-6'7 talk was ridiculous. Did people not see him playing next to Brandan Wright?


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

james harden 6'5.25 with a huge wingspan. decent numbers for him.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

Thoughts:

- Hill measured well, but I still think his stock is hyperinflated; I don't see a star there, I see a Wilcox; 12ppg/8rpg in 28mpg; I would trade down and take Gani Lawal, who's probably 85-90% of Hill, at 20 spots cheaper

- probably my most underrated guy in this draft, Derrick Brown, measured excellent - over 6'8 in shoes, 225lbs, and a 7'2.5 wingspan to complement his freakish athleticism; he's a little mechanical, but I think he has huge upside as an elite complementary player; has all the tools to be a stud SF; like in my Hill/Lawal example above, I would pass on Clark and Johnson, and trade down 10+ spots to select Derrick and receive additional assets

- James Johnson, BTW, is huge at 257; I've been high on him for a while; I think he's skilled and quick enough to play SF full-time; he may be one of the few guys (like Artest) that may actually be able to put a body on LeBron

- the biggest loser out of this group of data seems to be DeMarre Carroll, who was listed at 6'8/225 during the season, but squeaked in here at 6'7/207; he might be trying to position himself as an NBA SF, but I think he's better off putting that 20lbs back on and getting cozy in Europe

- Blair is 6'5.5 without shoes, ouch; name me the last 6'7, 280lb All-Star PF; I think the Barkley comparisons are absolutely stretching it; Charles at his peak (Dream Team/'93 Finals) was probably one of the top 3 players in the league; does anyone really see that here? does anyone really see more than a squatty, bruising, rebounding specialist? how about let's start with Danny Fortson and go from there

- Harden absolutely solidified his place in the top 5 after measuring over 6'5 in shoes, 220+lbs, and 6'10+ wingspan; in a weak draft, he's one of the surest things here; any mocks that have him out of the top 5 (and probably 4) are insane

- many talked about Marcus Thornton as a potential sleeper, but he couldn't crack 6'4 in shoes or 200lbs - not good for a guy that doesn't pass the ball; I wouldn't take him in the first 50 picks

- the PG situation after Rubio and Jennings is a huge cluster****; they all have significant flaws in some way; either too small (Flynn, Lawson, Mills, Collison), unathletic (Curry, Maynor), or not a true PG (Holiday, Teague) 

- I like Flynn the best of the mini-points - he has bulk and a decent wingspan for his size; he can score, pass, has athleticism, and a kind of charisma you like to see in points, especially smaller ones

- I think Curry will be a Derek Fisher type - can start as a shooting point on a team with a primary ballhandler not playing PG (i.e. LeBron/Kobe/Wade/etc)

- I'm all over the place on Maynor; I've been high on him for a while, but that's cooled; he measured tall, but he's painfully thin for his size (164lbs at over 6'3 in shoes) and has a terrible wingspan; when trying to come up with a reasonable comparison, one guy that kept coming to mind was Acie Law, although I think that's his relative downside - I think there's Cassell upside, though too; he's a guy I could see averaging 14.5ppg/6apg as well as seeing him becoming relegated to back-up duty; I think he'll ultimately go to a team that places a premium on intangibles/readiness/etc like IND or DET and end up somewhere in the middle of those scenarios

- who knows how the hell to value Jrue at this point; we have one very average year sharing the backcourt with a seasoned college stud in Collison; like Curry, I think he has the most value as a huge point playing next to a primary ballhandler; the Delonte West comparison seems much more reasonable than the Wade ones; he's probably the safest of all these options due to his size, versatility, and stability on both ends of the court; the question here is how much upside he has

- Teague is probably my favorite as the 'best of the rest' here; he's a little small, but he measured an excellent wingspan over 6'7; I think he may have the most star potential of this group; he's aggressive and seems to have a desire to be great; reminds me of Bayless, with better defense and less strength/explosiveness

- where these PGs end up is obviously hugely determined by team need and style of play; regardless, front offices really have their work cut out for them trying to sift through this bunch; it'll be very interesting to look back at this PG crop in 5 years; I think the results will be very surprising


----------



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

I can't see any comparison between Holiday and West. West has terrible handles, and his right hand is functionally useless. He can't even handle himself with his right hand. West is basically a spot up shooter. Holiday's more like Rondo than anything else (i.e. a guard that can handle but couldn't shoot Jenna Jameson in a bukkake video). He's really the last guy you want playing next to Wade or Bryant, because you're essentially playing four on five at that point.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

RebelSun said:


> Thoughts:
> 
> - Hill measured well, but I still think his stock is hyperinflated; I don't see a star there, I see a Wilcox; 12ppg/8rpg in 28mpg; I would trade down and take Gani Lawal, who's probably 85-90% of Hill, at 20 spots cheaper
> 
> ...


You couldn't be more wrong about Marcus Thornton. The link the original poster gave said Thornton measured at 6'4" and 200 lbs. I think that's good enough to not affect his draft stock much. Also, Thornton is NOT a ballhog as you implied. He is a playmaker and a very good scorer who can shoot the 3, hit the midrange jump shot, and take the ball to the goal. If you wouldn't take him in the first 50 picks, you are insane.


----------



## rebelsun (Nov 25, 2003)

jalen5 said:


> You couldn't be more wrong about Marcus Thornton. The link the original poster gave said Thornton measured at 6'4" and 200 lbs. I think that's good enough to not affect his draft stock much. Also, Thornton is NOT a ballhog as you implied. He is a playmaker and a very good scorer who can shoot the 3, hit the midrange jump shot, and take the ball to the goal. If you wouldn't take him in the first 50 picks, you are insane.


FWIW, I got my numbers from DraftExpress, which lists him as 6'3.75 in shoes, 194lbs, and having a 6'5 wingspan:

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

When I say he doesn't pass the ball, I don't mean a black hole, I mean having legitimate playmaking/distribution ability. 2.1apg (albeit w/ a positive AST/TO ratio) doesn't satisfy that criteria for me. Ultimately, 6'3-6'4 guys without length or bulk that aren't at least above-average playmakers, which I don't think is an unreasonable characterization of Marcus, have trouble sticking as NBA SGs. I agree Thornton is a capable scorer, but at that size and with a lack of PG skills, he has his work cut out for him carving out a long-term career in the league.


----------



## croco (Feb 14, 2005)

Media Availability Interviews

More analysis on the measurements


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Josh Heytvelt fell off the map but he's got some solid measurements. I mean isnt it weird they have him projected as a second round pick yet Daye is supposed to go in the lottery?


----------



## GNG (Aug 17, 2002)

HB said:


> Josh Heytvelt fell off the map but he's got some solid measurements. I mean isnt it weird they have him projected as a second round pick yet Daye is supposed to go in the lottery?


I think Daye is a prime candidate to take a nose dive on draft night.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

RebelSun said:


> FWIW, I got my numbers from DraftExpress, which lists him as 6'3.75 in shoes, 194lbs, and having a 6'5 wingspan:
> 
> http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/
> 
> When I say he doesn't pass the ball, I don't mean a black hole, I mean having legitimate playmaking/distribution ability. 2.1apg (albeit w/ a positive AST/TO ratio) doesn't satisfy that criteria for me. Ultimately, 6'3-6'4 guys without length or bulk that aren't at least above-average playmakers, which I don't think is an unreasonable characterization of Marcus, have trouble sticking as NBA SGs. I agree Thornton is a capable scorer, but at that size and with a lack of PG skills, he has his work cut out for him carving out a long-term career in the league.


That link has measurements based on newspaper articles and not official measurements but it doesn't really matter, the links we were both referring to were .25" and 4 lbs different...close enough if you ask me. NBA GMs is what really matters of course. In looking at his numbers, I can see where you would think he isn't a playmaker. However, I have seen him play many, many times and he only gets better. Not only is he a great scorer (and for this weak draft, I would venture to say he is one of the best pure scorers in the draft), I have also seen him create for others many times and believe he has the ability to do it more. I also believe his game translates to the NBA very well, as he is a very good one on one player and has unlimited range. I agree that his stock would definitely be better if he would have shown some PG skills. About his size...while he measured shorter than some other 2's, I wouldn't hesitate to have him guard a guy like Wayne Ellington. I'm a Carolina fan and love Ellington but Thornton is every bit as good as he is. At very worst, I think Thornton can be a scoring combo guard off the bench in the NBA who cannot be left open at the 3 point line. His workouts with other 2 guards in team workouts will go a long way in determining his draft position.


----------



## Geaux Tigers (Apr 26, 2004)

RebelSun said:


> FWIW, I got my numbers from DraftExpress, which lists him as 6'3.75 in shoes, 194lbs, and having a 6'5 wingspan:
> 
> http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/
> 
> When I say he doesn't pass the ball, I don't mean a black hole, I mean having legitimate playmaking/distribution ability. 2.1apg (albeit w/ a positive AST/TO ratio) doesn't satisfy that criteria for me. Ultimately, 6'3-6'4 guys without length or bulk that aren't at least above-average playmakers, which I don't think is an unreasonable characterization of Marcus, have trouble sticking as NBA SGs. I agree Thornton is a capable scorer, but at that size and with a lack of PG skills, he has his work cut out for him carving out a long-term career in the league.


I can't _disagree_ with anything you said but in the right situation Marcus could thrive in the NBA. I'm thinking Phoenix, New York, New Jersey, New Orleans...


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

croco said:


> More analysis on the measurements


This seems to explain why almost everyone measured taller than expected. Ty and Wayne are .5'' taller and Danny, who's the tallest, came in .75'' taller. Wouldn't shock me if the big guys are a full inch or more over measured. And it's probably more for guys who have shorter wingspans, because if arms are very long then legs presumably are likewise very long, then the torso makes up less of the player's height, so there is less spine to shrink/expand.

IMO, this doesn't bode well for Blake Griffin, and even though Blair is mostly arms and legs, this stretching is a massive concern for him now because it's possible he's under 6'6'' in shoes.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

jalen5 said:


> That link has measurements based on newspaper articles and not official measurements


no it doesn't.


----------



## jalen5 (Nov 19, 2004)

rocketeer said:


> no it doesn't.


My bad, it said Measurements Prior to 2000 were based on newspaper articles. I overlooked the Prior to 2000 part.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

I am confused as to why they measured them so early because you don't play basketball at 6:30 AM. Wouldn't you want to see how tall they were at noon and beyond?


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Hasheem Thabeet has a 7'6" wingspan. :laugh:

Holy ****!


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

RebelSun said:


> Thoughts:
> 
> - Hill measured well, but I still think his stock is hyperinflated; I don't see a star there, I see a Wilcox; 12ppg/8rpg in 28mpg; I would trade down and take Gani Lawal, who's probably 85-90% of Hill, at 20 spots cheaper
> 
> ...


Dude, you're reading waaaayyyy too much into these measurements. How many times have players proved that height and weight don't necessarily mean anything?

Chuck Hayes, Chris Paul, Allen Iverson, Aaron Brooks, Craig Smith, Nate Robinson...all these guys are undersized but have gone on to do in the pros exactly what they did in college.

If you're good enough, the fact that you're 6'3" instead of 6'5" means diddly squat.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

And quite frankly I still dont know the justification for saying Harden is one of the surest things in the draft when he pretty much disappeared in the NCAA tourney

*rocketeer* in 5, 4, 3, ....


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Measurements definitely matter. It can be the difference between being a starter and a bench player for a lot of guys. It's one of the reasons that Ben Gordon is one of the least appreciated "good" players in this league. He has a tremendous wingspan, athleticism and shooting ability, but because he is short, people don't feel he's worth the kind of money someone like Monta Ellis is paid, even though he is just a better player.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Yeah measurements really help explain why some guys are good. Rondo is such a great defender because he has long arms, etc etc.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Another good example is Carl Landry and Paul Millsap. Lack size, but make up for it in wingspan. Tremendous wingspans and yet even with that, when they run into guys like Lamar Odom, who are tall with long wingspans their productivity goes way down.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

Same for Maxiel. You look at him and think "the guy is a 6'5'' power forward? destined for a life in the D-League", but he's good because he jumps high and if he's reaching up in the air his arms go as high as Horford's, Noah's, Wilcox's, and David Lee's.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

HKF said:


> Measurements definitely matter. It can be the difference between being a starter and a bench player for a lot of guys. It's one of the reasons that Ben Gordon is one of the least appreciated "good" players in this league. He has a tremendous wingspan, athleticism and shooting ability, but because he is short, people don't feel he's worth the kind of money someone like Monta Ellis is paid, even though he is just a better player.


I would love for Memphis to steal Ben Gordon. I love that dude's game. Fearless and explosive. Not sure how he would fit but I want him...


----------



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

MemphisX said:


> I would love for Memphis to steal Ben Gordon. I love that dude's game. Fearless and explosive. Not sure how he would fit but I want him...


He's really the ideal backcourt mate for Mayo, who has the size to guard the 2 and the game to QB the offense. Mayo/Bengo would be one of the better backcourts in the NBA. If they can talk LA into a Gay/#2 for #1 the Grizz would have the makings of a contender.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> He's really the ideal backcourt mate for Mayo, who has the size to guard the 2 and the game to QB the offense. Mayo/Bengo would be one of the better backcourts in the NBA. If they can talk LA into a Gay/#2 for #1 the Grizz would have the makings of a contender.


It's interesting, but I don't think Griffin's as much of a sure thing as everyone else does. I'd just draft Thabeet and then either keep Gay, or try to get a different pick for him. However, in my opinon Gay would be a good complimentary player to those guys. He runs, he plays defense, and he doesn't have a problem with defering to his teammates (which we saw at UConn).

Then next year if they're late in the lottery, I think there's some good talent at the forward positions, namely Favors, Aminu, Brackins, Monroe, Cousins, and maybe Stanley Robinson if he gets his head on straight, which it looks like he's starting to do.


----------



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

I don't want Thabeet at all. The 70s are over there to the left. This is a perimeter oriented game now. Griffin's as good as it gets in this draft class. And he's going to be a load to cover in the NBA. Give him a pair of pick & roll parters like Mayo & Gordon, and you have the makings of a team that will score in bunches.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

Perimeter oriented game? In a league where Yao, Dwight, Shaq, Big Z are still considered some of the best centers. Thabeet might never be an all star, but he's going to be productive.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

HKF said:


> Measurements definitely matter. It can be the difference between being a starter and a bench player for a lot of guys. It's one of the reasons that Ben Gordon is one of the least appreciated "good" players in this league. He has a tremendous wingspan, athleticism and shooting ability, but because he is short, people don't feel he's worth the kind of money someone like Monta Ellis is paid, even though he is just a better player.


I'm not saying that the difference between 6'2" and 6'8" doesn't matter. I'm saying that when you look at James Harden, it's obvious that he's good enough and tall enough to be a good SG in the NBA.

So whether he is 6'4" or 6'5", it doesn't matter. That inch isn't going to mean anything. It's not as though people say, "I have no idea how tall so-and-so is...he could be too small, he could be too tall. OOOOH LOOK AT THAT! He's 6'8"! Awesome!"

You can tell by watching guys play whether they're too small or don't have a long enough wingspan...the official measurements don't tell us anything except exactly how small or tall someone is.

Everyone knew before Ben Gordon was measured that he was going to be undersized at the 2. It wasn't as though people realized it when he was officially measured.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> I don't want Thabeet at all. The 70s are over there to the left. This is a perimeter oriented game now. Griffin's as good as it gets in this draft class. And he's going to be a load to cover in the NBA. Give him a pair of pick & roll parters like Mayo & Gordon, and you have the makings of a team that will score in bunches.


It's hilarious that you say that on a night when Dwight Howard might eliminate LeBron's Cavs by scoring 45 points.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Denver lost because they couldn't get enough effective defense in the paint when it counted. You still need a good 7'0 footer if you can get one. I mean the game is not completely perimeter.


----------



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

HKF said:


> Denver lost because they couldn't get enough effective defense in the paint when it counted. You still need a good 7'0 footer if you can get one. I mean the game is not completely perimeter.


I agree that a good post defender is a necessity, but frankly I'm not wasting a high draft pick on one unless there are no other alternatives. I mean, frankly, Kendrick Perkins is one of the top post defenders in the NBA and Boston drafted him at the end of the first round. If the choice is between Griffin and Thabeet, that's not a question at all. I'm taking Griffin twelve times out of ten. He's got the speed and hops to play help D, so I'm not worried about it.


----------



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

Nimreitz said:


> It's hilarious that you say that on a night when Dwight Howard might eliminate LeBron's Cavs by scoring 45 points.


If Thabeet were Dwight Howard he'd be the consensus #1 pick. He isn't.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

ehmunro said:


> I agree that a good post defender is a necessity, but frankly I'm not wasting a high draft pick on one unless there are no other alternatives. I mean, frankly, Kendrick Perkins is one of the top post defenders in the NBA and Boston drafted him at the end of the first round. If the choice is between Griffin and Thabeet, that's not a question at all. I'm taking Griffin twelve times out of ten. He's got the speed and hops to play help D, so I'm not worried about it.


If Perkins had gone to college he wouldn't have been a late first round pick.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

ehmunro said:


> If Thabeet were Dwight Howard he'd be the consensus #1 pick. He isn't.


Which doesnt change the fact that a low post presence still has value in the game, both on the offensive end and defensive end. Dwight's low post game is just as mechanical as Thabeets'.

Another thing we learned tonight is that midget backcourts are a recipe for disaster.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

The thing is ehmunro, that Perkins was pretty much just a goon before Garnett got there. I mean he had played 4 years of nondescript basketball and then KG gets there and his confidence soars through the roof. I am not saying Thabeet will be better than Griffin, because I am not sure that's the right question. Griffin is not an achor. He will need a center playing next to him that can defend the paint, because Griffin to me looks like a numbers guy. He'll get numbers, but he is not a two-way player.

This past season I have seen Perkins, Roy Hibbert, Samuel Dalembert and a few others at least slow down Dwight Howard. If Howard is going to get better, you're going to need a big body that at least doesn't just get moved easily. I like Thabeet's long term potential. Griffin's knee injuries scare me because he's such an athlete.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

LOL at your boy Hibbert slowing down Superman. Howard's numbers against the Pacers:

24/17
32/21
22/10
21/20


----------



## YoYoYoWasup (Nov 14, 2004)

Griffin's measurements aren't impressive at all. 8'9 standing reach? This guy better learn a jumpshot because he is going to get swatted routinely if he ever tries to go in the paint on a consistent basis. Yes, he's a great athlete, but an 8'9 standing reach is just horrible.


----------



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

HKF said:


> The thing is ehmunro, that Perkins was pretty much just a goon before Garnett got there. I mean he had played 4 years of nondescript basketball and then KG gets there and his confidence soars through the roof. I am not saying Thabeet will be better than Griffin, because I am not sure that's the right question. Griffin is not an achor. He will need a center playing next to him that can defend the paint, because Griffin to me looks like a numbers guy. He'll get numbers, but he is not a two-way player.


I'm not sure that Perkins was just a goon before Garnett showed up. I said all along that playing next to Jefferson made him far worse. Jefferson was a hopeless help defender, so they let him pretend to guard the post. Perkins was left to handle the help D, which he was a disaster at. He was a step late everywhere and moved awkwardly enough that he kept hitting people. Once they brought in a help defender and let Perkins do the one thing that he can, defend the rim, he's looked like a highly proficient defensive roleplayer. 

I'm positive that Thabeet will be a highly proficient defensive rolepleyer. But why waste a #2 pick on a player like that? I mean, yes, technically Kwame Brown was a #1 pick, but the Wiz weren't picking him to be a post defender, they expected a lot more out of him.



HKF said:


> This past season I have seen Perkins, Roy Hibbert, Samuel Dalembert and a few others at least slow down Dwight Howard. If Howard is going to get better, you're going to need a big body that at least doesn't just get moved easily. I like Thabeet's long term potential. Griffin's knee injuries scare me because he's such an athlete.


Right, Howard needs a face up game. As of now the big, physical post players can slow him down in the paint, and he can't effectively take them out onto the perimeter. I'm not sure that Thabeet is going to be one of those guys. He's just one of those guys that I would rather trade than draft.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Thabeet just needs to improve his leg base and he should be fine.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Nimreitz said:


> LOL at your boy Hibbert slowing down Superman.  Howard's numbers against the Pacers:
> 
> 24/17
> 32/21
> ...


You can't look at the numbers and not watch the game. Hibbert did very well against Howard but was relegated to mostly 16 minute nights. Jeff Foster played the vast majority of minutes and gave quite a few players career nights. He played Howard to a standstill in many of those games for the minutes he was out there. The problem is, he is a rookie and is not going to get the benefit of the doubt on any calls.


----------



## HKF (Dec 10, 2002)

Yeah Hibbert didn't stop Howard by any stretch of the imagination. I am just saying, he made Howard work more than guys like Z and Varejao did.


----------



## YoYoYoWasup (Nov 14, 2004)

Hibbert did a solid job on Howard, but Dwight certainly got his points against him.

I'm with HKF on this one, though. Even if he's never good offensively, Thabeet will be a difference maker defensively. He's too big, wide, and long not to be. I said it as soon as the lottery ended, the Thunder are in a great position to nab Thabeet. With scorers like Durant, Westbrook, and Green already there, all they need now is a defensively dominator in the paint, and Thabeet fits that bill. After years of tossing out bums like Robert Swift, Johan Petro, and Saer Sene, Thabeet will be a welcomed addition.


----------



## Nimreitz (May 13, 2003)

YoYoYoWasup said:


> Hibbert did a solid job on Howard, but Dwight certainly got his points against him.
> 
> I'm with HKF on this one, though. Even if he's never good offensively, Thabeet will be a difference maker defensively. He's too big, wide, and long not to be. I said it as soon as the lottery ended, the Thunder are in a great position to nab Thabeet. With scorers like Durant, Westbrook, and Green already there, all they need now is a defensively dominator in the paint, and Thabeet fits that bill. After years of tossing out bums like Robert Swift, Johan Petro, and Saer Sene, Thabeet will be a welcomed addition.


If I was the Thunder I would never draft Thabeet. He's better than all of those bums you listed, but there's too much bad history with that franchise to take a raw center. But with that Ben Gordon suggestion, I'm now convinced that the Grizz should draft Thabeet and throw a ton of money at Ben.


----------



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

The Grizz already have the good Gasol.


----------



## rocketeer (Oct 7, 2002)

HB said:


> And quite frankly I still dont know the justification for saying Harden is one of the surest things in the draft when he pretty much disappeared in the NCAA tourney
> 
> *rocketeer* in 5, 4, 3, ....


just for you, i'll respond.

how did eric gordon do in the ncaa tournament(3-15 for 8 points, 1 assist, 3 rebounds)?
or how about how did courtney lee do during the most important game of his season(7-29 for 18 points and did have 8 rebounds)?
russell westbrook had some god awful ncaa tourney games.

all three were terrible players and had awful rookie years, right?

i think harden's body of work and what he has proven over 2 seasons of playing college basketball is much more important to use to project how he will be in the nba than 2 ncaa tourney games.


----------



## Vermillion (Mar 23, 2004)

Damn is Tyreke big...and he can really play the point full-time? Wow.


----------



## bball2223 (Jul 21, 2006)

Vermillion said:


> Damn is Tyreke big...and he can really play the point full-time? Wow.


I wouldn't quite say that. His measurements made him some money, but I'm still not sold on him as a point full-time. Memphis was infinitely better with him at the PG spot because he was able to go one on one and initiate the offense with the dribble (which is essential in the DDM). The other guys Calipari tried at the 1 weren't the threat 'Reke is to go one on one and they were turnover prone. Evans isn't a great distributor yet which I think will delay him from becomng a full-time PG. He can definitely play some 1 part-time, and share the ball-handling duties but he isn't a full time one. Evans is going to be a super player if he can correct his jumper because of his size, and his ability to take hs man off the bounce.


----------



## MemphisX (Sep 11, 2002)

ehmunro said:


> I agree that a good post defender is a necessity, but frankly I'm not wasting a high draft pick on one unless there are no other alternatives. I mean, frankly, Kendrick Perkins is one of the top post defenders in the NBA and Boston drafted him at the end of the first round. If the choice is between Griffin and Thabeet, that's not a question at all. I'm taking Griffin twelve times out of ten. He's got the speed and hops to play help D, so I'm not worried about it.


The problem is there are so few good post defenders in the NBA that actually impact the opponents offensive scheme. Yao is not a great defender but his sheer size makes opponents think twice before going into the lane. Just that slight delay allows help defenders to recover. And Yao is no where near the shotblocker Thabeet projects to be in the league.

In this draft, where almost every player has serious questions about his actual NBA fit. Thabeet actually has a place. I also think that people forget how little Mutombo was used offensively in the NBA after his rookie year. His usage level is similar to Kendrick Perkins who is an afterthought on offense. I think Thabeet would thrive in both Memphis and OKC because they have scorers in place to carry the load and resources to get more. Just don't even think about his offense. There is some value in being a 10/10/3 guy in the NBA especially if you have the common sense to just dunk everything at the rim and not try and become a scorer.


----------

