Statistical Analysis. Humor. Knicks.

Thursday, April 24, 2014

Draft Measurements Are Available

caleb Said:

Draft news — NBA has released official measurements and athletic testing results from the Orlando combine.

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

On first glance I didn’t see any huge surprises. Except, Patrick Ewing, Jr. registered the highest vertical jump of anyone in the camp. (like DJ Strawberry last year).

Of the top guards, Mayo, Gordon and Bayless all had great vertical jumps. (Mayo an inch higher)

Gordon was very strong, outlifting most of the forwards. Mayo and Bayless did fine for their size.

Gordon was almost the fastest player in camp; Bayless a step behind and Mayo was middle of the pack on the sprints.

Brook Lopez is extremely slow and isn’t very strong, either. DeAndre Jordan isn’t much better.

Anthony Randolph (6?10, 197) is about the skinniest person ever, except maybe Shaun Livingtson. That’s either a) bad — he’ll break like Shaun Livingston; or b) great — he was a good college player despite being excruciatingly skinny, so when he puts on weight he’ll be unstoppable!

An even better source for the measurements: http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-draft-measurements/

24 comments on “Draft Measurements Are Available

  1. Z

    Looks like Joe Alexander was the 2nd fastest and 2nd strongest. Has his stock gone up since the camp?

  2. Brendan

    Does anyone know if there’s a useful body of research illustrating a link between these kinds of measurements and actual NBA performance? I was under the impression that they formed part of some of the college player projection systems people have, but that’s about all I know.

  3. o_boogie

    I forgot where I read it, but apparently for every 2 inches your wingspan is greater than your height it makes you play like you are an inch taller. For example, Tayshaun Prince is 6’9″ and has a 7’2″ wingspan. That adds 2.5 inches to his virtual height, making him play more like hes 6’11″. This would explain his excellent defense and timely blocks.

  4. caleb

    ” I was under the impression that they formed part of some of the college player projection systems people have, but that’s about all I know.”

    The two systems I’m more familiar with (Hollinger’s and Erich Doerr) don’t take this stuff into account — that’s sort of the point, that any measurement and “analysis” is meaningless — it’s already factored into performance on the court.

    For example, they would say that if a player’s “athleticism” hasn’t translated into rebounds, steals, FTAs, etc. while in college, it won’t help in the NBA, either.

    One exception — Hollinger docks points for players 7-foot and taller, because historically — in his analysis — those players have been overvalued.

    I’m not an expert on their systems, though — anyone else know more?

  5. Brendan

    That’s interesting, I thought Hollinger’s did take that into account- the idea being you can play center and board well at, say, 6’9 in college, while that makes you an undersized 4 in the pros.

  6. caleb

    Brendan,

    That’s the idea of these analyses– if you can rebound in college, you can rebound in the pros — how tall you are doesn’t matter.

    The biggest difference between Doerr and Hollinger, I think, is Hollinger’s understanding of age — how much more young players are likely to improve, than older ones.

  7. Mike K. (KnickerBlogger) Post author

    “That’s the idea of these analyses– if you can rebound in college, you can rebound in the pros — how tall you are doesn’t matter.”

    I don’t know if I agree with that, especially for undersized centers. I’m thinking of the Glen Davis/Othella Harrington mold. Weren’t they good rebounders in college?

  8. caleb

    Well, it doesn’t mean that because you averaged 14 rebounds per 40 in college, you’ll do it in the pros — the competitition is tougher. But, relative to your peers, you will do approximately as well, i.e. the nature of the game doesn’t change dramatically.

    I’d have to go back and look at Davis & Harrington. With Harrington, if you think of his pro career as a disappointment, remember that he played through his junior or senior year, which makes his college stats less impressive. To compare apples to apples, you’d want to look at his numbers as a freshman or soph, compared to other freshmen or sophs. The development curve isn’t the same for everyone, but that’s an important factor.

    Anyway, I’m not a complete tout for these stat-based analyses, but last year at least, I think Hollinger and Doerr did about as well, or better, than the actual drafters.

  9. caleb

    a better example, off the top of my head, would be Byron Houston – a near-dominant college player, who went nowhere as a pro because he was 6’4 and strictly a back to the basket player.

    But I’d have to look at his stats to see if there wasn’t a clue…

  10. ess-dog

    I’m sure it’s tempting to go off these measurements,especially because 2 of the top performers in Gordon and Alexander also had great college statistics last year. Gordon hasn’t proven to be a clutch player though (albeit, in only one year of college) and Alexander is still a mystery after a breakout year.
    Obviously what matters most is what the players can do with the ball in their hands…

  11. daaarn

    wow, Jr. has the biggest ups? that’s kinda surprising (although seeing some of his dunks on YouTube kinda mitigates that surprise) but the findings on B. Lopez don’t surprise me at all.

  12. Duff Soviet Union

    I’m pretty sure Hollinger does take height into account. He does dock 7 footers quite a lot, but he also docks 6’8 or less power fowards, 6’3 or less shooting guards and 6’0 points. I think that’s it. Maybe it’s 6’4 shooting guards or sub 6 footers but it’s something like that. He doesn’t take “standing reach” or “wingspan” or “vertical leap” or anything like that into account. Not sure if that’s a good thing or bad thing.

  13. Duff Soviet Union

    As an addendum to my previous post, the effected guys this year look like Beasley (who I’m sure will still look awesome), Bayless (assuming he’s not a point) and Gordon (who sucks anyway).

  14. daaarn

    i’m just glad isaiah isn’t make the pick. no doubt he’d go for gordon b/c of these measurements

  15. Ray

    Well…maybe that hurts Lopez’ stock real bad. We should be smart enough not to pick him.

  16. jon abbey

    incredible numbers by Alexander, I can’t believe how fast he is. maybe he’s a real option at 6, then maybe we could move Balkman in a TJ Ford deal.

  17. Brian Cronin

    I bet Ewing now sneaks into the draft. Good for him.

    And yeah, those Alexander numbers are nuts.

  18. Z

    “Anthony Randolph (6?10, 197) is about the skinniest person ever…”

    Yeah. He’s compared to Bosh, but Bosh weighed in at 30 pounds heavier. Does anyone know what Camby’s weigh-in was in ’96? (The draftexpress link didn’t list Camby for some reason). He was really skinny coming out of UMass.

  19. Thomas B.

    Alot of people are talking about Joe Alexander the same way they spoke of Danny Granger in 2005. Infact, Granger’s draft measurements are pretty close to Alexander’s in terms of strength, agility and leaping. I know the Knicks are loaded at the SF but it Alexander a guy we consider at 6? I’d rather pick up a second first round pick and see if we can pick up a guy that him later on.

    One draft site that I always enjoyed ( I won a draft trivia contest there last year).
    http://www.thedraftreview.com/index.php?option=com_frontpage&Itemid=1
    check it out.

    This is not a deep draft in terms of estalbished talent, but it is heavy on potential. Alexander, Buddinger, Jordan, Javale McGee, Westbrook, Randolph, ect are very interesting and any of them could become a solid contributor.

  20. Nick

    I don’t know that having Wilson Chandler, Renaldo Balkman and Jeffries qualifies as loaded, but I think PG would be higher priority. I think loaded might be the Showtime Lakers with Wilkes, Worthy and Cooper. Isiah is gone, I hoped thet wishful thinking way of evaluating the team and talent would be gone as well.

  21. Ted Nelson

    “I think PG would be higher priority”

    I hoped that acquiring players based on need would be gone with Isiah, too.

Comments are closed.