Basketball height prejudice? (with poll)

[ppine]

Cousins good.
Thomas bad.
Deonte Green at the 2 0r 3
Rudy Gay as a 2
Vasquez good at the 1 because he is 6'6"

After participating in this forum for awhile I can only conclude that some people equate size with ability. Americans are known to be guilty of lookism. We prejudge people by how they look. Apparently it is true in sports. Small people can't possibly play basketball with any skill.

Size is not that important if you get there first...even in the NBA.

 

[sdballer]

Yep. That's why there have been so many nba stars under 6'. Yawn.

There's a reason undersized guys that excel are the exception.

Also, once again the IT brigade misses the point. No one thinks he's bad, just a bad defender whose offensive style is better suited as a 6th man. But don't let that get in the way of your napoleonic persecution defense campaign.

 

[dmj]

A player's stature along with their athletic ability plays a huge role in their effectiveness. Thomas' defense will always suffer to a degree because at 5'9" he isn't able to contest shots as effectively as an average sized point guard. I personally think he makes up for it with his play on the offensive end, where his athleticism and shooting ability negate his height disadvantage, but a lot of others disagree.

He does see a disproportionate amount of criticism from people here, though, and I have wondered whether his height motivates those criticisms.

 

[PurpleHaze]

"Little" Steve Nash is good five inches taller than "little" IT. Plus, "slow" two time NBA MVP Nash has always been all about team - team defense and team offence in getting everyone involved.

 

[MissingThoseAdelmanDays]

A player's stature along with their athletic ability plays a huge role in their effectiveness. Thomas' defense will always suffer to a degree because at 5'9" he isn't able to contest shots as effectively as an average sized point guard. I personally think he makes up for it with his play on the offensive end, where his athleticism and shooting ability negate his height disadvantage, but a lot of others disagree.

He does see a disproportionate amount of criticism from people here, though, and I have wondered whether his height motivates those criticisms.

Yep. That's why there have been so many nba stars under 6'. Yawn.

There's a reason undersized guys that excel are the exception.

Also, once again the IT brigade misses the point. No one thinks he's bad, just a bad defender whose offensive style is better suited as a 6th man. But don't let that get in the way of your napoleonic persecution defense campaign.

Exactly. I completely agree. Thomas is a great scorer. Unfortunately, basketball involves this other thing called....um....defense. I think.


In response to "dmj":

No. He does not "make up" for his defensive liabilities with his play. If that were the case, albeit there are other issues, we'd have a better record.

 

[Gilles]

A player's stature along with their athletic ability plays a huge role in their effectiveness. Thomas' defense will always suffer to a degree because at 5'9" he isn't able to contest shots as effectively as an average sized point guard. I personally think he makes up for it with his play on the offensive end, where his athleticism and shooting ability negate his height disadvantage, but a lot of others disagree.
He does see a disproportionate amount of criticism from people here, though, and I have wondered whether his height motivates those criticisms.

Cousins is the only guy, who can slack off on defensive end if there's a threat of foul trouble. With Gay coming in, who produces offense, while being above average on defense, Kings don't need offense at the expense of defense.

 

[ESP47]

Yep. That's why there have been so many nba stars under 6'. Yawn.

There's a reason undersized guys that excel are the exception.

Also, once again the IT brigade misses the point. No one thinks he's bad, just a bad defender whose offensive style is better suited as a 6th man. But don't let that get in the way of your napoleonic persecution defense campaign.

Is his offensive style better suited as a 6th man? He's been getting 7-10 assists every game for a while now.

 

[bajaden]

I swear, if there's one more thread about IT, I'm going to throw up!

 

[The_Jamal]

I swear, if there's one more thread about IT, I'm going to throw up!

Indeed. I may be wrong, but I think there are 11 other Sacramento Kings players we can talk about. There's obviously 2 camps of thinking about the value of IT. Neither side is going to change.

 

[rainmaker]

It's not prejudice to bring up size. It happens across all sports. You don't see many 5'8" PGs, NFL QB's, WR's, TE's, CB's, MLB pitchers, strikers/forwards or CB's/FB's in soccer, men's volleyball players that short, or even male Olympic swimmers of that stature, among other sports for a reason. The reverse is also true. You don't see 6'4" male gymnasts. You don't see 6'4" NFL running backs. Size in sports matters, whether some want to acknowledge that or not.

And when you find differences in size such as this:

or this:

it will be an issue.

 

[VF21]

Cousins good.
Thomas bad.
Deonte Green at the 2 0r 3
Rudy Gay as a 2
Vasquez good at the 1 because he is 6'6"

After participating in this forum for awhile I can only conclude that some people equate size with ability. Americans are known to be guilty of lookism. We prejudge people by how they look. Apparently it is true in sports. Small people can't possibly play basketball with any skill.

Size is not that important if you get there first...even in the NBA.

We're talking about basketball here. Basketball is a game where height matters. If you cannot understand that, this discussion is pretty much doomed.

Your last sentence is simply silly.

 

[VF21]

A player's stature along with their athletic ability plays a huge role in their effectiveness. Thomas' defense will always suffer to a degree because at 5'9" he isn't able to contest shots as effectively as an average sized point guard. I personally think he makes up for it with his play on the offensive end, where his athleticism and shooting ability negate his height disadvantage, but a lot of others disagree.

He does see a disproportionate amount of criticism from people here, though, and I have wondered whether his height motivates those criticisms.

Seriously? I am as critical of IT as anyone here and ... brace yourself ... I'm only 5'1". So are you saying I'm prejudiced against short people?

People criticize IT - sometimes to excess - because he has liabilities that are as bad as his strengths are good. And his biggest liability is that he's freaking short. It hampers him in defending the majority of guards who are larger than he is and it makes tougher for him to bring through screens, etc. That's just the way it is.

 

[VF21]

I swear, if there's one more thread about IT, I'm going to throw up!

Indeed. I may be wrong, but I think there are 11 other Sacramento Kings players we can talk about. There's obviously 2 camps of thinking about the value of IT. Neither side is going to change.

Basically, you can pretty much tell by the title of the thread what the subject is, especially in this case. I generally chuckle at people who swear they don't like a particular thread when, instead of commenting, they could simply move on to the next topic of discussion.

 

[Bricklayer]

 

[Entity]

Seriously? I am as critical of IT as anyone here and ... brace yourself ... I'm only 5'1". So are you saying I'm prejudiced against short people?

People criticize IT - sometimes to excess - because he has liabilities that are as bad as his strengths are good. And his biggest liability is that he's freaking short. It hampers him in defending the majority of guards who are larger than he is and it makes tougher for him to bring through screens, etc. That's just the way it is.

maybe just maybe the op original intents were about cousins not being exactly 7'

I could be wrong

 

[Padrino]

Cousins good.
Thomas bad.
Deonte Green at the 2 0r 3
Rudy Gay as a 2
Vasquez good at the 1 because he is 6'6"

After participating in this forum for awhile I can only conclude that some people equate size with ability. Americans are known to be guilty of lookism. We prejudge people by how they look. Apparently it is true in sports. Small people can't possibly play basketball with any skill.

Size is not that important if you get there first...even in the NBA.

yeah, it's definitely a prejudice. it has nothing to do with the fact that demarcus cousins is clearly bound for superstardom at 23 years of age...



i can't believe that i, of all people, am saying this, but some days i'd much rather deal with jimmermaniacs over those IT acolytes who whine over misconception regarding fan "prejudice" against the little fella...

 

[Uncia03]

Cousins good.
Thomas bad.
Deonte Green at the 2 0r 3
Rudy Gay as a 2
Vasquez good at the 1 because he is 6'6"

After participating in this forum for awhile I can only conclude that some people equate size with ability. Americans are known to be guilty of lookism. We prejudge people by how they look. Apparently it is true in sports. Small people can't possibly play basketball with any skill.

Size is not that important if you get there first...even in the NBA.

I just finished typing up a huge post in the JT thread trying to explain why JT is such a good 3rd big by looking at all the league's 3rd bigs.
The thing is IT is a fantastic 6th man scoring guard off the bench. He's about as good as you can get.
No-one is saying that he can't play basketball because he's short. People are saying that his height impacts the role he can play in the NBA.

I've got an idea. Why don't you add a poll to this thread and ask them to rate IT as 6th man in the NBA. When looking at all the teams in the league IT should be ranked <blank> as a 6th man.
With the choices being:
Top 3
4-6
7-10
ect.

My guess is that you're going to get a majority of Top 1-6 votes. And if you do, then it blows this whole theory that people don't like IT due to his height right out of the water. He's a great NBA player, but due to his height, he's simply better in the role of elite 6th man rather than starting PG.
I don't know why people seem to get all bent out of shape on this issue.

 

[Chubbs]

This is the NBA, right? It's not for short people. Sorry, go play baseball or football. Many short RBs have had much success. It's not predjudice, it's reality. Some of us live in reality, others look at offensive efficiency numbers and think it's all that matters.

Where's the thread about the predjudice against 5'7 220 lbs offensive lineman?

This thread makes me laugh, honestly.

 

[Chubbs]

Uncia nailed it. I'd have him as a top 5 sixth man. Easily. Most would.

As a starter, he doesn't cut it. Bottom 5 starter, numbers or not. The win/loss record speaks for itself there.

Off the bench behind a legit reasonably sized human, he'd be a monster.

 

[Padrino]

I just finished typing up a huge post in the JT thread trying to explain why JT is such a good 3rd big by looking at all the league's 3rd bigs.
The thing is IT is a fantastic 6th man scoring guard off the bench. He's about as good as you can get.
No-one is saying that he can't play basketball because he's short. People are saying that his height impacts the role he can play in the NBA.

I've got an idea. Why don't you add a poll to this thread and ask them to rate IT as 6th man in the NBA. When looking at all the teams in the league IT should be ranked <blank> as a 6th man.
With the choices being:
Top 3
4-6
7-10
ect.

My guess is that you're going to get a majority of Top 1-6 votes. And if you do, then it blows this whole theory that people don't like IT due to his height right out of the water. He's a great NBA player, but due to his height, he's simply better in the role of elite 6th man rather than starting PG.
I don't know why people seem to get all bent out of shape on this issue.

indeed, and well said.

 

[VF21]

And the poll...

YAY, I did it on the first try. I am incredibly proud of myself.

You're welcome.

 

[Bricklayer]

Not sure that poll is really in the spirit of this thread.

 

[Glenn]

Thank you.

 

[Glenn]

I just finished typing up a huge post in the JT thread trying to explain why JT is such a good 3rd big by looking at all the league's 3rd bigs.
The thing is IT is a fantastic 6th man scoring guard off the bench. He's about as good as you can get.
No-one is saying that he can't play basketball because he's short. People are saying that his height impacts the role he can play in the NBA.

I've got an idea. Why don't you add a poll to this thread and ask them to rate IT as 6th man in the NBA. When looking at all the teams in the league IT should be ranked <blank> as a 6th man.
With the choices being:
Top 3
4-6
7-10
ect.

My guess is that you're going to get a majority of Top 1-6 votes. And if you do, then it blows this whole theory that people don't like IT due to his height right out of the water. He's a great NBA player, but due to his height, he's simply better in the role of elite 6th man rather than starting PG.
I don't know why people seem to get all bent out of shape on this issue.

The only people who fail to see this point are the people who want to argue perpetually and he's a good subject for that - I guess. I hope we keep him but I am fearful that with all the media attention and adulation (Jerry and Grant) he'll price himself out of our ability to pay. He could be an important part on our team as it works its way up the standings but someone will look at his offensive stats and offer big money than is reasonable enough for us to pay.

 

[Uncia03]

The only people who fail to see this point are the people who want to argue perpetually and he's a good subject for that - I guess. I hope we keep him but I am fearful that with all the media attention and adulation (Jerry and Grant) he'll price himself out of our ability to pay. He could be an important part on our team as it works its way up the standings but someone will look at his offensive stats and offer big money than is reasonable enough for us to pay.

Good point and this is precisely why I expect that he'll end up being traded. The Kings FO will probably be talking to his agent to get an idea of how much he might cost, and if it's too large they will more than likely make a trade.
I think the door has been shut on him being a 6th man for us in the future, so in my mind it's either start or trade.

 

[Glenn]

Good point and this is precisely why I expect that he'll end up being traded. The Kings FO will probably be talking to his agent to get an idea of how much he might cost, and if it's too large they will more than likely make a trade.
I think the door has been shut on him being a 6th man for us in the future, so in my mind it's either start or trade.

Not convinced about the latter but you may very well be right. I have some faith in the persuasiveness of Vivek but then money talks and BS walks, right? It's too bad. My fear is that he is convinced now that he is a major force as a starter.

 

[Chubbs]

Not convinced about the latter but you may very well be right. I have some faith in the persuasiveness of Vivek but then money talks and BS walks, right? It's too bad. My fear is that he is convinced now that he is a major force as a starter.

Yeah, I think I posted something similiar. Or at least thought it. I actually thought you were quoting me. I definitely thought it.

But yeah, it's hard to see him going back to the bench for us. And the more he starts the less likely it gets. He probably needs to be traded or risk getting nothing for his time here.

 

[Glenn]

Yeah, I think I posted something similiar. Or at least thought it. I actually thought you were quoting me. I definitely thought it.

I can see where confusion could occur.

 

[DesertFox]

IT has played like a top 10 PG this year, and the sample size is enough for me to say he's a top 15 PG going forward. He is good enough to start on a playoff team, and depending on the players surrounding him, if I squint I can see him starting on a contender.
While I think IT is ideally a 6th man (especially on a team heavy on scoring), if he stays on a non-winning team like Sac it will not be off the bench. I would bet against him being on this team next year.

 

[mac]

Good point and this is precisely why I expect that he'll end up being traded. The Kings FO will probably be talking to his agent to get an idea of how much he might cost, and if it's too large they will more than likely make a trade.
I think the door has been shut on him being a 6th man for us in the future, so in my mind it's either start or trade.

And my fear is that the FO will overvalue him. He is a fan favourite to many, a guy with a reputation of playing with heart. Coaches love him, he's putting up good offensive numbers... will PDA be fooled into overpaying for him? I see him sort of as a John Salmons kind of leader. All talk, coaches somehow love him, but we're never a good team with him playing major minutes. I'm not comparing their individual productions on the court of course, but rather the overall effect on the team.