Griffin or Rubio????

[Oprostaj]

Nobody can tell you exactly how Rubio will turn out. Nobody has a crystal ball. Proponents of Rubio point out that he has shown a playmaking ability in a professional leauge that only a few have shown here, that he has been playing professional bball since he was 15, that he has the physical attributes to play in the NBA. They will also say he is not the most athletic, not a great jumpshooter, and we don't know how his game will translate to the NBA. The proponents want him over college PGs because they are college PGs, many of whom have shown only one year of solid play while defeating schools whose players had as much right to be on the court as me. Don't be ignorant and lump everybody in under one premise.

Those of us who like Rubio see his faults and weaknesses. We are just realistic and understand that he is 18, fills our need more than Griffin does, and hell, we just like the guy.

 

[Gliesian]

Those of us who like Rubio see his faults and weaknesses. We are just realistic and understand that he is 18, fills our need more than Griffin does, and hell, we just like the guy.

I agree. Unless we trade Jason for a point guard, I'd rather have RR.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I'm a little puzzled. You talked as if Wade shouldn't be mentioned because he wasn't considered the BPA, so you're talking about concensus (a big part of who's the BPA). But in the next breath you completely dismissed concensus.

I, for one, don't want to base anyone on consensus. Griffin is the best player becasue he's the best one I've seen outside of the NBA. Simple as that.

First of all, the 03 draft was an example of what can happen when you let good talent slip to your conference rival; it sure can come back to haunt you in a tangible way (in this case being knocked out of PO).

Second, I'm not comparing Darko to Rubio. I never saw Darko played in Europe so I won't go there. But there are several parallel with the 03 draft:

1) Like Rubio, there was a LOT of hype surrounding Darko before the draft. Again, I never saw Darko played in Europe, perhaps the hype was justified.

2) There were sure-thing like Carmelo, but for reason that never quite fully explained, almost everyone fell in love with Darko. The questions that many people wanted to know back then is similar to the question many people are asking now, "If Darko isn't a sure-fire All-Star then why don't the Piston draft Carmelo, who at worst is a borderline All-Star?"

3) American players who played with or againsted Darko all had nothing but high praise for the kid. Sports Illistrated had a full article on him, said the 7-footer is a combination of the best of both worlds - Euro skill and NBA toughness.

And lastly, I'd argue that there is no such thing as "All things being equal/comparable then draft for need." Things are never equal, I don't know of a way to compare a PF and a PG. All I can say is that if Griffin is used properly, he will have a bigger impact on a game than Rubio.




Are you saying Griffin's #1 status is due to biased consensus towards bigs and that Rubio is the BPA at #1? If that's the case, I'd say you're wrong on both account.

It has to do with the context of which it's used, there is actual BPA (the player we know was the best based on hindsight) and there is perceptual BPA which is what player is perceived to be the best talent at the time. It can all get very subjective but I was jus making the point that Wade was not the perceived BPA (which is more relevant since we're judging the Pistons on an "at the time" basis) at the time, if anything he was considered overdrafted by some, he was not considered a polished talent.

As far as letting talent go to your conference rival, you're making it more complicated than it really is. You can't stop a rival team from getting talent beyond acquiring the best talent that's available to you. If you make the obvious move and that is take the player that makes your team better the most than there is nothing to worry about, you did the most you could to improve your team, and whatever happens outside of that is outside of your control. You don't win by preventing other teams from doing things because there are too many teams to compete with and they can all make unforseeable moves that can't be stopped by you. Detroit thought they were going to get the eventual best player and a future star player, if they made any sacrifices in that pick at the time it's readiness of talent vs. Carmelo. Make no mistake though, they thought they were getting the eventual biggest impact player on the board.

Darko is an enigma in that his attitude took a complete 180 once he hit the NBA. Maybe it was the money, maybe it was Larry Brown, and maybe it was being away from home, who knows? On draft day he was a legitimate all-star big in the making. I'm not arguing that Carmelo wasn't the polished talent and the safer pick, but they had a good team and they felt they could afford to wait and take the risk on the player with the higher upside. Darko is probably a lesson in when you have a ready probable all-star available at your pick it's probably best to play it safe. The problem is Griffin isn't comparable to Carmelo, while he is a very good college player like Carmelo, Carmelo's game was far more compatible to the NBA at the time than Griffin's is.

Yeah it's hard to objectively compare talent level at two different positions, but it's hard to objectively judge talent level period. If one doesn't signficantly stand out at their respective positions over the other than it comes down to preference, whether that preference is need or what positions are more impacting on the game or as value among the league.

I think Griffin is considered consensus because he's been pegged for this draft class since the beginning of the year while Rubio has not (and it's still not a sure thing), he's probably the best player in college basketball, and more people have seen him play. When/if it comes down to Rubio being in the draft for sure then the talk will get a little more interesting, but ultimately I think Griffin will stay consensus overall pick because of the reasons I mentioned and that he's a big.

Rubio is just as good of a prospect IMO, and I prefer him because I think he has a better chance at being the tops at his position (while Griffin will probably be 2nd tier at his position), he plays a position that impacts the game more, and it's a position of need for us. Griffin is a big that is not going to impact the game defensively, he's not a low post scorer, and it's very quesitonable whether he develops into a very good shot creator. So his rebounding is his main impacting big skill, but while rebounding gives you extra possessions, guards make those possessions worthwhile. I respect the argument of Griffin over Rubio, I'm well aware of Rubio's weaknesses but in the end I think that he's got the better chance of being the better impact player. Higher downside but I think with his IQ, ball handling, vision/passing, maturity, leadership qualities, length, height, and overall athleticism (what he lacks in first step he makes up with his great ability to change directions/speeds) will make up for lack of a J off the dribble and quickness. With Rubio I'm thinking that if his shot can get good enough where he can hit it with consistency over a pick, then he's going to be a quality player. He's probably already as good in pick and roll situations as anyone in the NBA.

 

[bajaden]

.

Griffin is a big that is not going to impact the game defensively, he's not a low poster scorer, and it's very quesitonable whether he develops into a very good shot creator. So his rebounding is his main impacting big skill, but while rebounding gives you extra possessions, guards make those possessions worthwhile.

I would agree with you that he will not immediately impact the game defensively. What I'm confused about is you saying that he's not a low post scorer. In fact, he does almost all of his scoring in the low post. Do you mean in the NBA he won't be able to score in the low post?

I think people are underselling his low post skills a little. He does have some nice drop step moves. You know this isn't rocket science. He's a great athlete. He works hard at the game and is very coachable. He's intelligent. Why do people think that he's incapable of learning low post moves? All it takes is hard work and commitment.

Now away from the basket is another story. He does have a midrange jumpshot that doesn't look that bad. I doubt many people have seen it, because he's probably taken it five times all year. But this is something that any team that drafts him will have him work on. Someone made the comment that they didn't think he had the quickness to make the moves that Boozer makes around the basket. I think Griffin is one of the quickest players that I've seen in a long time when he makes his move to the basket.

The problem with the Griffin/Rubio senario is, as you stated, we simply don't have the ability to see Rubio play. I've seen him play two games and in one of those he didn't play all that much. Its impossible to give an opinion based on just those two games and some youtube video. Griffin, I've see play over 20 times over the last two years. So I think I've got a pretty good read on him. But how can I possibly compare the two. All I can go by are the few NBA scouts that I hear being interviewed on the radio, or the info that I get from draftexpress. But then, all I'm doing is giving their opinion, not mine.

This same senario applies to Jennings, who was going to arrive on the college scene with great fanfare. Except that he didn't arrive. So what are we to believe? Holliday arrived with great expectations, and he may slide all the way down to the bottom of the first round.

Most GM's probably already have a good idea of what each player is capable of. Unlike us, I'm sure Petrie has made several trips to Europe to see some of these guys play. He'll bring them in for individual workouts to comfirm what he already believes. Then I'm sure he'll give you and me a call with a heads up.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I'm not saying he can't develop a low post game, anything's possible, but I don't see it at this point. I'm saying that he's not a guy you can dump the ball in to and have him be a consistent scoring threat on the block. He's much like Martin in that he's going to take set jumpers, score off offensive rebounds, lobs, and attack the basket from the high post.

 

[KingGiant49erFan]

Size has never trumped length or speed in the NBA and, in recent years, rule changes intended to encourage less bruising and more cruising for a faster, more free-flowing game have only increased the disparity in value. Show me a player whose wingspan -- reach from fingertip to fingertip -- is longer than his height and, with everything else equal, I'll show you a devastatingly effective player, regardless of position, because he can control airspace without his feet leaving the floor.
Just look at the NBA logo, a.k.a. Jerry West: 6' 2", 185, with, legend has it, the same wingspan as Wilt Chamberlain. Add speed to that reach (which West had) and a player can defend taller, heavier opponents at one end and blow by them at the other. Because you're sure to ask: Michael Jordan 6' 5", 6' 11" wingspan. (Same for Kobe.) Yes, LeBron James is 6' 9" and 270-plus pounds, but he made an impact from Day One, some 25 pounds lighter, because of a 7' reach and a point-guard's explosiveness.
Overall, length and speed translates into more rebounds, steals, deflections and blocked shots -- the measuring sticks of defense. Which, legend has it, wins championships.
-- Ric Bucher, senior writer


http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=4020805


Rubio is reported to have a 6'9" wingspan.. Just sayin..

 

[beb0p]

Nobody has a crystal ball. Proponents of Rubio point out that he has shown a playmaking ability in a professional leauge that only a few have shown here, that he has been playing professional bball since he was 15, that he has the physical attributes to play in the NBA. They will also say he is not the most athletic, not a great jumpshooter, and we don't know how his game will translate to the NBA. The proponents want him over college PGs because they are college PGs, many of whom have shown only one year of solid play while defeating schools whose players had as much right to be on the court as me. Don't be ignorant and lump everybody in under one premise.

Those of us who like Rubio see his faults and weaknesses. We are just realistic and understand that he is 18, fills our need more than Griffin does, and hell, we just like the guy.

I know there are poster who want everyone to agree with him/her. I am definitely not one of them. I like to hear the opposite point of view. I like to understand the other side. I mean, how boring would life be if everyone shares my point of view, right?

But this goes back to my post, which is, there is not a lot of information from the proponent side other than, "young, good playmaker, likeable, draft him!"

Try to see it from my point of view: I'm trying to understand your argument but the argument is just too vague.

I dont' want to make this out to be a homework assignment but is it possible to dive a little deeper? I'm not looking for you to bust out a crystal ball but at least tell me how you project him in the nba?

 

[Warhawk]

Size has never trumped length or speed in the NBA and, in recent years, rule changes intended to encourage less bruising and more cruising for a faster, more free-flowing game have only increased the disparity in value. Show me a player whose wingspan -- reach from fingertip to fingertip -- is longer than his height and, with everything else equal, I'll show you a devastatingly effective player, regardless of position, because he can control airspace without his feet leaving the floor.
Just look at the NBA logo, a.k.a. Jerry West: 6' 2", 185, with, legend has it, the same wingspan as Wilt Chamberlain. Add speed to that reach (which West had) and a player can defend taller, heavier opponents at one end and blow by them at the other. Because you're sure to ask: Michael Jordan 6' 5", 6' 11" wingspan. (Same for Kobe.) Yes, LeBron James is 6' 9" and 270-plus pounds, but he made an impact from Day One, some 25 pounds lighter, because of a 7' reach and a point-guard's explosiveness.
Overall, length and speed translates into more rebounds, steals, deflections and blocked shots -- the measuring sticks of defense. Which, legend has it, wins championships.
-- Ric Bucher, senior writer


http://sports.espn.go.com/espnmag/story?id=4020805


Rubio is reported to have a 6'9" wingspan.. Just sayin..

Quincy Douby also had really long arms for his height.

Just sayin'.

 

[beb0p]

I respect the argument of Griffin over Rubio, I'm well aware of Rubio's weaknesses but in the end I think that he's got the better chance of being the better impact player. Higher downside but I think with his IQ, ball handling, vision/passing, maturity, leadership qualities, length, height, and overall athleticism (what he lacks in first step he makes up with his great ability to change directions/speeds) will make up for lack of a J off the dribble and quickness. With Rubio I'm thinking that if his shot can get good enough where he can hit it with consistency over a pick, then he's going to be a quality player. He's probably already as good in pick and roll situations as anyone in the NBA.

V4GM, I appreciate you giving a pretty thorough analysis.

And my question is, assuming Rubio does all the things you said, won't that make him along the line of an Andre Miller (ie a good but not great PG)?

 

[beb0p]

Quincy Douby also had really long arms for his height.

Just sayin'.

I recall Allan Ray (note: not Ray Allen) has like a 6'-8 wingspan. He's 6'-1 in socks.

 

[Packt]

Quincy Douby also had really long arms for his height.

Just sayin'.

So does our very own Ike Diogu.

One part says "everything else equal" and we know this league is quicker and more athletic than others. Unfortunately the speed part wasn't bolded, even though it is a big part Bucher's argument.

 

[Vlade4GM]

V4GM, I appreciate you giving a pretty thorough analysis.

And my question is, assuming Rubio does all the things you said, won't that make him along the line of an Andre Miller (ie a good but not great PG)?

No disrespect to Miller, but he's simply not as creative as Rubio. Miller has good PG skills, but there is a Miller level and then there are the Nash and Kidd levels, and Rubio is on their level. If his athleticism and jumper prove suffice then I have no doubt that he'll end up being in the same breath as Kidd and Nash in terms of playmaking ability. I understand that people think that's a big if (re: athleticism and jump shot) but in terms of vision, ball handling, IQ, creativity, and passing he's at the top level. He just needs the other things to fall in place, which is a considerable if, I'm not going to say it isn't, and if this draft had more talent at the top Rubio might not still be the guy at the top of my list. Still I like his talent and upside more than anyone else in the draft so I'm on his bandwagon.

 

[bajaden]

I'm not saying he can't develop a low post game, anything's possible, but I don't see it at this point. I'm saying that he's not a guy you can dump the ball in to and have him be a consistent scoring threat on the block. He's much like Martin in that he's going to take set jumpers, score off offensive rebounds, lobs, and attack the basket from the high post.

You don't just don't see it at this time. Pray tell, what crystal ball do you have that I don't have? What are your reasons for not seeing it. The guy is a hard worker. He's intelligent. He's a superior athlete. He's coachable. What is it that makes you think he can't be a consistant scoring threat on the low block. He is nothing like Martin. He never shoots jump shots. All he does is play on the low block. Are we talking about the same player, or are you just making this up as you go? I'm starting to doubt that you have ever seen him play.

You list all of Rubio's flaws, most of which have to do with his initial quickness and his slow shot release. Yet you have no problem believing that he can overcome his deficencies and be a good NBA Pt guard. Not so with Griffin. Whats amazing to me, is that you seem to have such a good analysis of Rubio, who you've hardly seen, but such a poor one of Griffin, whose been on television an abundance of times.

 

[Oprostaj]

I know there are poster who want everyone to agree with him/her. I am definitely not one of them. I like to hear the opposite point of view. I like to understand the other side. I mean, how boring would life be if everyone shares my point of view, right?

But this goes back to my post, which is, there is not a lot of information from the proponent side other than, "young, good playmaker, likeable, draft him!"

Try to see it from my point of view: I'm trying to understand your argument but the argument is just too vague.

I dont' want to make this out to be a homework assignment but is it possible to dive a little deeper? I'm not looking for you to bust out a crystal ball but at least tell me how you project him in the nba?

I do understand your point, and you're right, it would be boring if everyone agreed. I see him as Jason Kidd on the playmaking level. He still has time to learn how to defend (many players coming out of college have the same defficiency)and if he can hit the open J (too many people here are saying he couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat) we will be fine with him running the ship. I don't worry about his athleticism because there are too many "athletic" guards who couldn't guard my 80 year old grandma. Athleticism is only good if you know how to use it. I'll take a smart player over an athletic one every day, especially in Rubio's case where he doesn't just have an "upside". He has proven his ability the past couple of years in a tough pro leauge, while the majority of these college stars have at most 2 years of solid play in the college ranks, which do not trully impress me. Individual talent is easy to recognize (rose, beasely, etc) but for every one of those there is a college player that put up big numbers that flames out. Rubio's game might not translate, but who says that Teauge will all of a sudden develop true PG instincts? or that Flynn will understand that you cannot be going 100 mph all time every time. or that Thabeet will HAVE to develop some sort of offensive game if he wants to stay on the floor other than put backs or dunks if he lands on any team that does not have Chris Paul on it. Every player has questions. I'd rather take one that is young, proven, and his biggest question is a weird jump shot? (Kmart, our kevin martin, pedja, camby, matrix...) so many players have these either slow, funky, weird releases, and they all made it work. I believe Rubio will too with a little bit of coaching.

 

[Oprostaj]

You don't just don't see it at this time. Pray tell, what crystal ball do you have that I don't have? What are your reasons for not seeing it. The guy is a hard worker. He's intelligent. He's a superior athlete. He's coachable. What is it that makes you think he can't be a consistant scoring threat on the low block. He is nothing like Martin. He never shoots jump shots. All he does is play on the low block. Are we talking about the same player, or are you just making this up as you go? I'm starting to doubt that you have ever seen him play.

You list all of Rubio's flaws, most of which have to do with his initial quickness and his slow shot release. Yet you have no problem believing that he can overcome his deficencies and be a good NBA Pt guard. Not so with Griffin. Whats amazing to me, is that you seem to have such a good analysis of Rubio, who you've hardly seen, but such a poor one of Griffin, whose been on television an abundance of times.

You comment on what you see. Griffin does NOT have a post game. If you see it, I'm pretty sure you are the only one. He can develop one, but it's more difficult at the next level. However, you are correct in the aspect that he plays on the low block - but not in the traditional way. He fights for offensive rebounds, dunks, lobs... there is no dropstep, no hookshot, no turnaround J a-la KG, no bank shot like Duncan. He has no actual 'move' that will make his defender give him space. He will get bodied up and shut down. He will have an impact, he is too athletic and too hard headed to be a bust, but I think what he/she was trying to say is that his game is not exactly tailored for the NBA as well as lets say... Beasely or Durant's was. I keep thinking him as a more athletic, this year Tyler Hansborough. Similar in terms of motor, drive, passion, game... Griffin has had better numbers this year, and Hansborough had a better team last year, but that's just me. No crytal ball, just an opinion.

 

[Vlade4GM]

You don't just don't see it at this time. Pray tell, what crystal ball do you have that I don't have? What are your reasons for not seeing it. The guy is a hard worker. He's intelligent. He's a superior athlete. He's coachable. What is it that makes you think he can't be a consistant scoring threat on the low block. He is nothing like Martin. He never shoots jump shots. All he does is play on the low block. Are we talking about the same player, or are you just making this up as you go? I'm starting to doubt that you have ever seen him play.

You list all of Rubio's flaws, most of which have to do with his initial quickness and his slow shot release. Yet you have no problem believing that he can overcome his deficencies and be a good NBA Pt guard. Not so with Griffin. Whats amazing to me, is that you seem to have such a good analysis of Rubio, who you've hardly seen, but such a poor one of Griffin, whose been on television an abundance of times.

You don't seem to get the idea that I'm talking about how he projects to the NBA, not how he functions as a college center. Right now the reasons are that he doesn't score with NBA level post moves. He doesn't appear to have Brand or Boozer length nor the lower base of them, which is something (base strength) he can definitely improve on (if he decides to go that way with his game) but those guys were/are at an elite level so that's still a lot of work in for him and who knows if his body is really capable of developing it like Brand or Boozer.

In the NBA not only do you need the lower body strength and the length to be a low post threat but you need the footwork, the touch, and most of all the go-to moves (drop-steps, hook shots, turn around J are the basics, like oprostaj has already mentioned) He doesn't have NBA level go-to moves in the post, he gets by on his strength and athletic/dunking ability. Right now he can set up on the block and drive around a guy for a dunk or back in with his strength for a power layup or something along those lines, but he's not going to be able to do that easily in the NBA. I suspect his game is going to develop more in terms of Martin with the set mid range J and dribble-drives rather than like Boozer. Boozer came out of college with those low post moves, and a much stronger lower base, and eventually developed that turnaround fallaway J to make him a consistent threat. I think if he's going to become a go-to scorer he's going to have to develop more of a high post, off the dribble game.

My original point when I made that comment was comparing the impact of guards vs. bigs and Griffin doesn't really provide either of the two main qualities of bigs that impact the game to a high level, which is a consistent low post threat (given, that's not a common trait in the NBA anymore, but that's also why guards, more specifically PG's have begun to impact the game more and more as bigs get more perimeter oriented) and defensive anchor (which he has shown no propensity for and doesn't have great size to expect it.) So when you take those things out, I'd much rather prefer the PG who changes the game with his playmaking. Now how well these guys are going to project in the NBA with their particular styles/positions is another discussion.

So yeah, he could develop those moves, but that's not done very often in the NBA at his stage in his development, and with his size that's even more of a detriment to being able to be a go-to scorer in the low post. So I'm not going to give him credit for something he doesn't do yet and it isn't easily developed, just like I'm not going to give Rubio credit for developing a consistent J. I'm just an amateur spectator though, so take my opinions for exactly what they're worth.

 

[nbrans]

Griffin does have a post game. It's not particularly refined, but he has a few moves, such as going baseline for a reverse and a nascent step back jumper. They're not likely to translate directly to the NBA, but he's not starting from scratch. There's a reason he's immediately double-teamed by almost every team he faces in college.

But his post game can absolutely be improved at the next level. Rubio can't improve his athleticism.

The reason I'm not totally sold on Griffin on the Kings is that I think he's not a particularly good fit for the roster as it stands. He looks like someone who's always going to be limited defensively because he doesn't have good instincts and he's probably always going to be on the smaller PF side. A more explosive David Lee is what I've been saying all along. Given the Kings' atrocious defense, adding yet another weak defender isn't particularly appealing.

So I'd still like to trade down if the Kings get the #1. But if a trade didn't materialize, I absolutely wouldn't take Rubio over Griffin.

 

[KF8]

Post game is pretty much a lost art in the NBA now a days. There arn't many power forwards or infact at any other position who has legitmate post moves they can go to consistently. The thing I worry about Griffin isn't so much of his post game, but his jump shot. I'm basically seeing Griffin as a power guy ala Boozer with the athletic ability of Amare Stoudamire. If you think about it.. neither Stoudamire or Boozer has much of a post game themselves. They basically rely on a combination of strength, athleticism, and speed inside. The difference between Stoudamire and Boozer versus Griffin is that Stoudamire and Boozer can hit the mid range shot while Griffin is unproven in that area so far. While having a good post game would be nice, you can still be successful if you are lacking in that area.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I don't want to give off the impression that he's starting from scratch (especially when you're using the more generic "post game"), but my point is I don't think he's going to be a guy you can dump it to down low and be a consistent scoring threat.

 

[Oprostaj]

Post game is pretty much a lost art in the NBA now a days. There arn't many power forwards or infact at any other position who has legitmate post moves they can go to consistently. The thing I worry about Griffin isn't so much of his post game, but his jump shot. I'm basically seeing Griffin as a power guy ala Boozer with the athletic ability of Amare Stoudamire. If you think about it.. neither Stoudamire or Boozer has much of a post game themselves. They basically rely on a combination of strength, athleticism, and speed inside. The difference between Stoudamire and Boozer versus Griffin is that Stoudamire and Boozer can hit the mid range shot while Griffin is unproven in that area so far. While having a good post game would be nice, you can still be successful if you are lacking in that area.

Griffin is not as athletic as Stoudamire, nor as strong as Boozer. He is about in between the two of them. He has more hustle in him than both of those players put together, so I'm sure he will compensate and be somewhat successful. I just don't see him having the size/strenght to be a very effective bruising 4, nor the finesse/jumpshooting ability to be a perimiter oriented 4. I just see him as stuck between, unfortunately. He doesn't play very big/long, he is just able to overpower/outhustle many of his defensive players. He won't be able to rely on his strenghts as much in the NBA, and I believe his effectiveness will take a hit.

 

[rainmaker]

Griffin doesn't have the same offensive arsenal as a 20 yr old Spencer Hawes. While Hawes has a much more well-rounded offensive game, Griffin's raw athleticism and hustle is what you would be banking on if you draft him. You just hope he can develope, because you see flashes of what he could potentially become.

Rubio is not the athletic specimen that Griffin is. Never will come close. But he is a more polished basketball player. Rubio has the skillset to help an nba team right now, but we won't know if his athleticism will hamper him untill we see him match up against nba pg's on anightly basis.

Both will have good nba careers. The question is can Rubio handle the athleticism of the top pg's in the world on a nightly basis? Griffin has the toughness and athleticism to help n nba team. But will he develope enough offensively to become an impact player?

 

[KF8]

Griffin is not as athletic as Stoudamire, nor as strong as Boozer. He is about in between the two of them. He has more hustle in him than both of those players put together, so I'm sure he will compensate and be somewhat successful. I just don't see him having the size/strenght to be a very effective bruising 4, nor the finesse/jumpshooting ability to be a perimiter oriented 4. I just see him as stuck between, unfortunately. He doesn't play very big/long, he is just able to overpower/outhustle many of his defensive players. He won't be able to rely on his strenghts as much in the NBA, and I believe his effectiveness will take a hit.

I don't think strength is something you'll have to worry about with Griffin because this is one of his stronger points. He may not be as athletic as Stoudamire, but there is no deny that his athletic ability is pretty much up there. The thing that might be a problem is his size and mid range shot. If he measures out to be at least 6'9" then that would be about the average size of an NBA power forward and if he is under 6'9" then there maybe some problems. I guess as it stands right now.. he is something like a more athletic weaker boozer with an unproven jumpshot. Strength though, is something you can always improve on. Kids will grow into their body. I dont recall Boozer being that bruiser that he is with his strength when he first came out of college.

 

[kingsnation]

Griffin is not as athletic as Stoudamire, nor as strong as Boozer. He is about in between the two of them

Of course not, they are years of experience ahead. Compare them with Griffin when they were still 6 months away from their first NBA game and then we'll talk.

Also, for those who don't want Griffin due to his size, here is a interesting snippet from an article by ESPN the Magazine on the topic of size in the NBA:

Size has never trumped length or speed in the NBA and, in recent years, rule changes intended to encourage less bruising and more cruising for a faster, more free-flowing game have only increased the disparity in value. Show me a player whose wingspan -- reach from fingertip to fingertip -- is longer than his height and, with everything else equal, I'll show you a devastatingly effective player, regardless of position, because he can control airspace without his feet leaving the floor.

Just look at the NBA logo, a.k.a. Jerry West: 6' 2", 185, with, legend has it, the same wingspan as Wilt Chamberlain. Add speed to that reach (which West had) and a player can defend taller, heavier opponents at one end and blow by them at the other. Because you're sure to ask: Michael Jordan 6' 5", 6' 11" wingspan. (Same for Kobe.) Yes, LeBron James is 6' 9" and 270-plus pounds, but he made an impact from Day One, some 25 pounds lighter, because of a 7' reach and a point-guard's explosiveness.

Overall, length and speed translates into more rebounds, steals, deflections and blocked shots -- the measuring sticks of defense. Which, legend has it, wins championships.

Rest here.

 

[bajaden]

I don't want to give off the impression that he's starting from scratch (especially when you're using the more generic "post game"), but my point is I don't think he's going to be a guy you can dump it to down low and be a consistent scoring threat.

I understand what you think. I just don't understand why you think it. Malone had no post game when he came out of college and he was a senior. Amare had no post game. Now that I think of it, he still doesn't have a very good post game. I could go on and on naming players that improved after arriving in the NBA. He is only a sophmore you know. I think there's plenty of time for hime to learn.

 

[Vlade4GM]

I was talking about a low post game which Amare does not have, he has no post moves to speak of. He built his offensive game around his uber-athleticism and a good pull up J. Griffin is not on Amare's level athletically. Malone, I couldn't say, I'm not old enough to know where Malone was when he came out of college.

 

[KingGiant49erFan]

I was talking about a low post game which Amare does not have, he has no post moves to speak of. He built his offensive game around his uber-athleticism and a good pull up J. Griffin is not on Amare's level athletically. Malone, I couldn't say, I'm not old enough to know where Malone was when he came out of college.

If he's not on amare's level athletically, hes certainly not far behind.

 

[Bricklayer]

If he's not on amare's level athletically, hes certainly not far behind.

And I am one of those who think he's a good athlete. But...

 

[nbrans]

Yeah, come on now, people. He's athletic, but he's not THAT athletic. Go watch some Kenyon Martin college highlight videos for comparison.

 

[bajaden]

You comment on what you see. Griffin does NOT have a post game. If you see it, I'm pretty sure you are the only one. He can develop one, but it's more difficult at the next level. However, you are correct in the aspect that he plays on the low block - but not in the traditional way. He fights for offensive rebounds, dunks, lobs... there is no dropstep, no hookshot, no turnaround J a-la KG, no bank shot like Duncan. He has no actual 'move' that will make his defender give him space. He will get bodied up and shut down. He will have an impact, he is too athletic and too hard headed to be a bust, but I think what he/she was trying to say is that his game is not exactly tailored for the NBA as well as lets say... Beasely or Durant's was. I keep thinking him as a more athletic, this year Tyler Hansborough. Similar in terms of motor, drive, passion, game... Griffin has had better numbers this year, and Hansborough had a better team last year, but that's just me. No crytal ball, just an opinion.

Well, I will agree and disagree to a point. All I was saying is the he scores almost all of his points in the post. He does not sit out there on the elbow and take jump shots. I can't remember the last jump shot he took. I was not saying that he was a poster boy for how to play the post.. However, he does have some post skills. He does use the drop step on occasion. He does have a purely right handed little jump hook. He also has some nice spin moves to the basket. Does he have a lot to learn? Sure he does. But to say he reminds you of Kenyon Martin, ( not you ) because thats what you believe he'll develop into. I just don't know what to say to that. I mean I could just make up anything, about any player and have it come out the way I want.

To say that your concerned about his lower base strength. ( again, not you) The guy is a physical specimen. He appears to have muscles on his muscles. Even the television comentator said the TV doesn't do him justice, for what thats worth. I mean this guy doesn't look like Jerome James. One of the things that the scouts talk about is his physcial strength.

In some ways this is almost amusing. I can't remember the last time I've seen a player with Griffins physcial ability and accomplishments, be so criticized. And, by the way, my endorsement of Griffin is in no way meant to be a negative in regards to Rubio. He may well turn out to be the bread and butter of NBA pt guards, and if we draft him, I certainly hope so. I just can't honestly give an opinion on him without seeing him play more games. What little I saw, I liked. But it was too little.

 

[bajaden]

Yeah, come on now, people. He's athletic, but he's not THAT athletic. Go watch some Kenyon Martin college highlight videos for comparison.

Do I have to? In all seriousness, I thought that Kenyon was turning into a pretty good basketball player until one day he woke up and discovered the three pt shot. For whatever reason, I think Kenyon went soft. Maybe he always was soft but couldn't figure out a way to get out from under the basket until he got into the NBA.