Is "athleticism" over-rated? (split from combine thread)
- Thread starter Vlade4GM
- Start date
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Yep. I'd really like to know what particular stat out of all of these stats correlates best to performance on the court. Maybe they look at a ratio of length to speed? Also, from what I can tell, they don't have a measurement for quickness, which I put a great value on.
NME
Starter
Hopefully, one day we'll have the technology for an X-Men Danger Room type simulation.
Telemachus
Starter
I personally think fans put way too much stock in athleticism. I'm not saying it isn't important, just not the most important criteria when I judge a player.
I also think it is hard to accurately measure a player's athleticism. For example; when I was in HS, I could jump and grab the rim with both hands from a standing position. However, I couldn't get high enough to dunk a basketball with both hands. In game situations, I was often told that my elbows got above the rim while going for rebounds. All I'm saying here is that my athleticism was much better during a game than when I was trying to show what I could do.
nbrans
All-Star
Well, I think fans put far, far too little stock in athleticism. If you look at the players that have busted in the lottery in the last 10 years, a whole lot of them busted because they weren't athletic enough. You need BOTH athleticism and skills, don't get me wrong, but there really aren't very many good players in the NBA who aren't very athletic for their position.
Telemachus
Starter
I agree that you need both athleticism and skills to succeed in the NBA. However, I will always put more importance on skills than athleticism. Any player with athleticism and poor skills will bust in the NBA. The opposite is not true.
Don't get me wrong, if a player is unathletic he will probably fail in the NBA. You need a mix of both with the focus on skills.
nbrans
All-Star
I think athleticism wins. Trevor Ariza and Shannon Brown are important players for the Lakers. Adam Morrison is not. Redick has a lot more skill than Pietrus, but guess who is more valuable.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
At the point of being reduntant, since I just addressed this on another thread, but your right. Thats exactly what I said. Quickness has to do with reflex action. You can have two people with the same vertical and the same speed etc. But one may have the ability to react quicker to the actions of his opponent. I think the other componet is just plain basketball instincts, or feel of the game. Its one of those things that just comes with playing and practice, if its going to come. I would liken it to trying to teach a running back how to juke out a tackler. You just can't teach that. You either have it or you don't.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
If you want I can come up with a list of players, some of them great players that wern't particularly athletic. I can also come up with a list of extremely athletic players that wern't very skilled and were busts, if you really want to go down that road. The point he was trying to make is that athleticism alone won't get you squat in the NBA. While players like a Steve Kerr made a living because they had some skills. Was Kerr a great player? No! The truth is that a player like him has to find the right team where his skill fits. But if you have no skills, you fit nowhere. Maybe someday Morrison will find his spot in the NBA. I don't really know if he's had a fair shot or not, nor do I care.
Here's where you and I fundamentaly differ. I have great respect for highly skilled players, because I know how hard they had to work to become that skilled. They weren't born with them. It took them hours and hours of practice to become the players they are. And I'm not omitting athletic players from that group. Hard work is hard work whether your athletic or not. But when I see an athletic player thats been playing the game for 7 or 8 years, and his skill level is still in the infantile stage, then I get disgusted with him. He's relying purely on his athleticism to get by. Ariza has become a decent player, and if he continues to improve he'll become a very good player. Why? Because he has improved his skill level.
No one is arguing against athleticism. Some of us are just saying that its not the be all end all. You can still be a great player and not be a super athlete as long as your very skilled. But if your a super athlete and have very few skills, your never going to be a great player.
nbrans
All-Star
We're talking about stars, not roleplayers though. And I think if you look at the stars in the NBA you'll see athletes, not skilled guys like Steve Kerr.
I appreciate that you recognize why you feel this way, but I think may result in a bit too sentimental of an NBA worldview. Athletic talent matters a whole lot more than hours shooting hoops, and it's like that in all walks of life. Some people just have a gift, and yeah, it's frustrating when they don't utilize it, but it's just the way the world works.
Jerryaki
Starter
but if you're looking at only these two variables and all else is held equal, shouldn't you place the emphasis on athleticism? you can develop more skills, depending on how hard you are willing to train and work. but you can't develop superior athleticism, even if you want to; your body just has a natural limit.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
So I assume then that you can take any great athlete and turn him into a basketball star. No one is arguing against athleticism. I just don't like athleticism without some skill level attached to it. If a kid has played basketball all through grade school and highschool and lets say two years of college, and still hasn't aquired basic basketball skills, and refined at least a couple of them, what reason do you have to believe he'll ever achieve them.
Basketball is a game of skills. If I can find a great athlete with a great skill level, I'm all over it. After that as I move down the scale, I tend to look first at players that still retain the great skill level, while the athletic side become less. Athleticism by itself is worthless. You can be able to jump high, run like a deer, have great reflex action and hand to eye coordination, and also be as dumb as a rock.
Many many years ago, the then, St. Louis Cardinal football team drafted one of the top offensive linemen in college out of the University of Missouri. I'm sorry, I don't remember his name. He had the rep of never being knocked off his feet once in college. A year and a half later he was out of the league. He couldn't remember the plays. But he was a great athlete by god.
Jerryaki
Starter
and i'm not arguing against skill. please don't put words into my mouth, i didn't say that you can take ANY athlete and turn him into a basketball star. but i would imagine it's EASIER to turn an athlete into a basketball star than it is to turn a basketball player with skills into an ATHLETE. many people have echoed on here that ideally, we'd like to have both. but if you can only pick one trait and HOPE TO develop the other trait, why would you pick to have skills when it is MUCH, MUCH more difficult to develop athleticism?
and you know, i can throw out an example to support my argument too. gerald wallace is a super-duper freak of an athlete, and when he was with us that was all he was. now he has skills because he trained and developed them. i would rather have a case like wallace than a case (to use your example) like steve kerr, who has the skills but in no way will he be able to handle the elite athletes in today's game.
basketball is a game of skill, but any sport is a game of athleticism. it's a good thing that you place an emphasis on skill above athleticism, because that's exactly the way petrie thinks and that's exactly how we got the roster of the past few years.
Last edited:
Vlade4GM
All-Star
The funny thing about baseball is that it requires (overall) the least amount of athleticism of the major sports, yet so many baseball scouts still value raw athletic tools over polished skills, and their values are revered instead of criticized.
bajaden
Hall of Famer
OK, I'm a little confused here. I never brought up baseball. I brought up football. But if you want to talk baseball, bring it on. I was a baseball player, and a damm good one. And yes, I was a pretty good athlete. Having dealt with scouts at one time in my life, I can tell you that they look for someone that can run fast. Has a good arm. Can hit the ball. Can hit for power. And can put all those things together into a skilled package. I know of no one in baseball who got excited over a great athlete, that wasn't a pitcher, that couldn't hit the ball.
Now I know I'm sort of making a case for athleticism here, but I've never known a great everyday player that wasn't a good athlete. Now pitchers, thats another story. Some are and some aren't. Some were and then became something else. Go figure..
Telemachus
Starter
Both Ariza and Pietrus have found their role in the NBA after they improved their skill level. Pietrus came into the league with great athleticism and poor skills, which resulted in him not being a very effective player for the Warriors. He has developed a few more skills to become a role player. I think Ariza came into the league with more skills that Pietrus and will likely have a better career.
As for your examples of Morrison and Reddick, I agree they aren't all that athletic. I would also point out that their skill level isn't all that high either. Morrison was a scorer in college with a lot of heart and energy. However, he is only an average passer and has poor handles. That makes him not an overly skilled player IMO. Reddick is a better passer than Morrison, but nothing to shout about. He also is an average at best ball handler. His main skill is shooting the ball, but once again, not what I would call a good skills player.
Like I said before, show me an athletic player without skills and he won't last in the NBA. Show me a skills player without great athleticism, and he may or may not find a place in the NBA.
Telemachus
Starter
From what I have seen from years of watching sports (not just the NBA) is that great athletes that get to the professional level without developing very many skills tend to rely on thier athleticism while only improving their skills a little bit.
If you look at all the great athletic players, the majority had already developed many of their skills prior to reaching the NBA. They weren't polished, but had shown the desire to learn already. Too many try to rely on their athleticism until it is too late to improve their skills.
That is why I prefer a skills first. If you can find a player with skills and athleticism, then you have something.
nbrans
All-Star
Are you really trying to tell me that Ariza and Brown are more skilled than Morrison and Redick? Come on now...
Count me among those who value raw athleticism over raw skill, provided that you can only choose one or the other, for the simple reason that one set of attributes can be learned, and the other can't. Which isn't to say that non-athletic skill players don't have their place, but they rarely end up being as valuable as very athletic players over the course of their careers. Pietrus/Ariza versus Reddick/Morrison are great examples: you can teach boxing out, passing, dribbling, timing, release points, follow through, et cetera. You can't teach a forty-inch vertical.
That being said, I also agree with the sentiment that work ethic and heart may be more valuable than either.
That being said, I also agree with the sentiment that work ethic and heart may be more valuable than either.
Showtime
Starter
Of course athletcisim is overrated. If you can jump out of the gym, but aren't smart enough or motivated enough to actually work hard and play the right way, then it doesn't matter what you can bench or how high your vert is. Primary example: Stromile Swift. Counter example: Brad Miller.
Telemachus
Starter
I would tend to agree with you. I think too many fans get caught up in leaping ability, speed, and quickness while basing too much of their assessment the measurements at the Chicago camp instead of what they see during a game.
Anyone who has followed sports for a while knows that certain player perform much better during a game than during practice. The opposite is also true. Grant likes to point out that Leon Wood was the best shooter in the world during practice, but struggled to score during a game (it would seem Douby had similar problems).
I think a couple of other things come into play as well. First, the overall work ethic of the player. I don't care how athletic a player is if he doesn't want to work on his game. The "busts" list of the NBA is littered with these kinds of players.
Secondly, you have to look the player's basketball IQ. This is MUCH harder to judge. Bill Walton once said that Larry Bird was the quickest player he ever saw play in the NBA. He wasn't basing that on Bird's athletic ability, but on the fact he usually out-thought his opponent. He said Bird would figure out what his opponent was going to do before it happened, and adjust accordingly.
Another example of that would be Doug Christie. He got a lot of steals because he had quickness, but also because he had great anticipation.
Telemachus
Starter
I haven't watched Brown play that much, so I would put in my 2 cents on him. As for Ariza and Morrison, I think their skill level is about the same (different skill set for each). As for Redick, I think he has more skills than Ariza, but still wouldn't call him one of the more skilled players in the NBA. As to which will have a better career, we will have to wait and see. Ariza has 2 years of experienc on Redick.
That being said, Redick has already done better in the NBA than I thought he would. Coming out of college, all I saw was an undersized SG that could shoot and do little else. He has shown the ability to work well without the ball to get a shot, and hasn't been as big of a liability on defense as I thought he would be.
Amory
Bench
Let's look back at the 2000 draft. The "athletic" Stromile Swift was chosen 2nd over all in the draft where as Hedo was chosen 16th by us. Hedo is competing for a championship and Swift played 19 games last season.
Of course both are needed, but I would go with skill over atheticism. Work smart not harder.
Just my 2 cents...we could debate this all day if we wanted to.
Of course both are needed, but I would go with skill over atheticism. Work smart not harder.
Just my 2 cents...we could debate this all day if we wanted to.
SacKings7
Starter
Yeah I agree with this too. A good work ethic and determination could be the difference between a spark off the bench and an All-star. This is why I have lost all respect for Vince Carter. Extremely talented and athletic player, but he admitted that he didn't try in his last little while with the Raptors. And it was obvious, all he did was shoot 3's.
My two cents is that you are intentionally distorting the argument. Turkoglu having more professional success than Swift is not a reflection of skill over athleticism; it's a reflection of Turkoglu being skilled AND athletic AND a hard worker, and Swift merely being an athletic kettlehead.
Gary
All-Star
There are just as many athletic players busting that don't have skills to compete.
I would rather have a skilled high IQ player that knows the game rather than some athletic freak who just started playing the game.
But it does go both ways. Skilled players who are not athletic enough to use those skills bust as well.
Kingster
Hall of Famer
Yeah, to go back to physics class, quickness is more like acceleration - it's the speed at which speed changes. Or, it can be thought of as how fast do you get to your max speed. It's also how fast do you get into a jump. They should be able to get a better idea of acceleration by shortening the distance in a race. Have a guy holding the ball in the ready position and see how fast he can travel 15 feet, or 10 feet after blowing the whistle. Same thing with the jump. See how fast he can jump to his max verticle. Teams like the Kings probably do these things in private workouts. The instinctual things, like knowing where you are in relation to all the other people on the court, reacting (like you mention above) you just have to be able to scout that in games. And of course, these tests say nothing of how a player is going react under severe pressure of a game.
Similar threads
