You're going to like John Brockman

[ITSCdanimal]

People need to seriously stop with the Barkley and Rodman nonsense. Those guys were elite atheltes, all time athletes. One could jump out of the gym and the other bounced around like a pogo stick. And they both could play the game in a lot of ways beyond their rebounding.

Brockman has absolutely NOTHING to do with those guys. You want to make an argument maybe he can stick, make it on the back of guys like Chuck Hayes and Reggie Evans.

Barkley was as non athletic as anyone in the league in his MVP season. And Rodman may have relied on his athleticism in his Detroit years, but was no more so than anyone on the court (other than Luc Longley) for three championship years with the Bulls. That doesn't mean that Brockman will be like either guy, but point is that Barkley wasn' jumping out of the gym, or much at all, when he mattered most; and Rodman may have jumped like a pogo stick but he wasn't elevating like Josh Smith to do it, it was all about effort and timing for him.

Maybe Brockman's ceiling is more like Malik Rose, back when he was a hustle/energy guy and before he was a pouty/lazy guy. That wouldn't be so bad...

 

[Telemachus]

I really cant believe that Rodman was only 6 6. Granted his long arms might have made him seem taller. Id have to look back at a team photo.

Don't forget that Rodman started his career as a SF for Detroit before moving to PF.

 

[Telemachus]

I did like this part, though:

Height and jumping ability are not the only key characteristics of a great rebounder. Positioning, quickness, timing and heart are perhaps even more important.

I'm always impressed by players who actually position themselves to have a chance at a board...and those are too few and far between.

This is what made Rodman a great rebounder. Everyone remembers his quick jumping and tipping the ball til he could grab it, but it all started by him getting into good position.

I can remember Bill Russell talking about how he would watch as much tape on players as he could. He liked to watch where players tended to shoot from and see where the missed tended to go most of the time. Then in games would move more toward those areas when shots went up during games. Maybe that is why is was one of the best rebounders of all time.

 

[ReturnOfTheKings]

Barkley and Rodman had great length and elite athleticism. According to draft express, he only has a 6'7 3/4 wingspan and that's including a pretty wide chest.

No one is trying to say he's a Barkley or Rodman. The point is that some people question his height for the position.

This is what made Rodman a great rebounder. Everyone remembers his quick jumping and tipping the ball til he could grab it, but it all started by him getting into good position.

Exactly.

 

[Bricklayer]

No one is trying to say he's a Barkley or Rodman. The point is that some people question his height for the position.

Yes -- because he's short for his position.

You can't select all time great freaks and say well look, the all time great freak with the one of a kind athletic traits made it at his size, therefore so can every other undersized schmoe. Not the way it works. The uniquely gifted can cheat, make up their own rules. Everybody else has to play by the rules.

 

[Semi]

Yes -- because he's short for his position.

You can't select all time great freaks and say well look, the all time great freak with the one of a kind athletic traits made it at his size, therefore so can every other undersized schmoe. Not the way it works. The uniquely gifted can cheat, make up their own rules. Everybody else has to play by the rules.

Jon Brockman plays by no ones rules cause Jon Brockman is.......

 

[Circa_1985_Fan]

I might have to change my outlook on Mr. Brockman...he is: Mark Madsen 2.0.

 

[roasthawg]

Brockman or Blair? The reason I ask is because I was really, really hoping Blair fell to us at #38... what do you guys think?

 

[VF21]

Brockman or Blair? The reason I ask is because I was really, really hoping Blair fell to us at #38... what do you guys think?

There's a thread with that exact question in the Personnel Moves forum.

------------------------------------

Back to the topic at hand...

I don't see Brockman as being the next Dennis Rodman and I don't need him to be the next Dennis Rodman. I do think he has a shot at being productive IF he makes the team.

If Brockman can bring some of the attributes people are talking about as being "tough," then I think he'll be fine. And the price is certainly right for us for now.

 

[HighTopKicks]

Not to change the thread, but; Who's taller Brockman or Diogu? Who has a longer wingspan? Who had a better college career? Who has a better outside shot?

Brockman's younger and was a good rebounder in college, but I'd like to see the Kings bring back Ike and let Brockman battle him for the backup PF spot thru preseason. Let the best man win.

 

[Henkel]

If Brockman is going to have a impact as a rebounder he is going to do it beneath the basket with his strength and toughness. Players like Barkley and to a lesser degree Rodman used their athletism and quickness to get to the ball above the rim instead of carving out space in the paint. Think Danny Fortson or Kevin Love instead of Rodman or Barkley.

 

[fnordius]

Not to change the thread, but; Who's taller Brockman or Diogu? Who has a longer wingspan? Who had a better college career? Who has a better outside shot?

Brockman's younger and was a good rebounder in college, but I'd like to see the Kings bring back Ike and let Brockman battle him for the backup PF spot thru preseason. Let the best man win.

--------------height------standing reach-----wingspan-----max vert----bench press----agil test time
Diogu------6'6.5"---------9'1"---------------------7'3.5"---------31"---------------21-----------------11.94s
Brockman--6'7"----------???----(Was invited to predraft combine, but didn't attend?)

College stats
-----minutes/gm---pts/gm---reb/gm--blocks/gm---asst/gm--TO/gm---FG%--3-pt%--FT%
Diogu-------36.4-------22.6------9.8-------2.3-------1.3--------3.6------57.5%----40.0%---79.7%
Brockman-30.5-------14.9-----11.5------0.1--------1.1-------1.9-------52.6%------0.0%---56.0%

 

[Fear the Putin]

6'4 7/8" barefoot.

Here he is standing next to Dr. J., who has said that he's 6'5 1/2" barefoot.

And again...

You can google it for confirmation. 6'6" was his height with shoes on.

that fro is deceiving...
I say Jordan was 6'5" without shoes....6'6" with

 

[fnordius]

that fro is deceiving...
I say Jordan was 6'5" without shoes....6'6" with

Since we're down to dickering about a fraction of an inch (barefoot only) now, I think we can stop.

 

[Kingster]

Brockman's success or failure is going to have nothing to do with his height. He should be able to rebound well in the NBA, but it's his lateral quickness that is going to be the limiting factor. Can he guard anybody? I have my doubts on that.

 

[OptimusRhyme]

Brockman's success or failure is going to have nothing to do with his height. He should be able to rebound well in the NBA, but it's his lateral quickness that is going to be the limiting factor. Can he guard anybody? I have my doubts on that.

WE do know that he can clog the lane tho and hes not afraid to use some hard fouls. He can bang and knock some people on their asses if they come into the lane which we really lacked last year. I think he could help the whole team develop this attitude of no easy baskets and hard work. Im just hoping he has enough leadership for it to rub off onto the other players.

 

[Kingster]

WE do know that he can clog the lane tho and hes not afraid to use some hard fouls. He can bang and knock some people on their asses if they come into the lane which we really lacked last year. I think he could help the whole team develop this attitude of no easy baskets and hard work. Im just hoping he has enough leadership for it to rub off onto the other players.

I wish I could remember how his battles with Kevin Love went in college. Just can't recall. If he can guard the Kevin Loves, the Blairs, the Big Baby's, and also keep them off the board, then yes, he can help the Kings, and he should make the team. I hope that he can.

 

[fnordius]

I wish I could remember how his battles with Kevin Love went in college. Just can't recall.

I didn't watch them, but maybe this will jog some memories.

1/10/08, Washington @UCLA
---------------Love--------------------------------Brockman
points-------11-------------------------------------16
FG%--------50%-----------------------------------50%
FT%---------100%----------------------------------50%
3pt%----------50%-----------------------------------0%
rebounds-----7----------------------------------------8
assists--------4----------------------------------------1

2/10/08, UCLA @Washington
---------------Love-------------------------------Brockman
points--------13------------------------------------12
FG%---------37.5%-------------------------------45.5%
FT%---------77.8%--------------------------------50%
3pt%----------0%------------------------------------0%
rebounds----10-------------------------------------17
assists--------1---------------------------------------2
blocks---------4---------------------------------------0

This year, he played very well against Alex Jacobson (Arizona) and Mike Dunigan (Oregon). He didn't do well versus Kansas, Florida Int'l, USC and Oregon State. He rebounded very well overall, but absolutely cannot block a shot (this year: 1 block per 337 minutes of PT). He's weak at the FT line. He's a good scorer as a garbageman, but has no range (3-point shooting in 2 years of college: 0-for-1). Basically, kind of like a shorter, thicker Jeff Foster.

 

[kingsnation]

I didn't watch them, but maybe this will jog some memories.

1/10/08, Washington @UCLA
---------------Love--------------------------------Brockman
points-------11-------------------------------------16
FG%--------50%-----------------------------------50%
FT%---------100%----------------------------------50%
3pt%----------50%-----------------------------------0%
rebounds-----7----------------------------------------8
assists--------4----------------------------------------1

2/10/08, UCLA @Washington
---------------Love-------------------------------Brockman
points--------13------------------------------------12
FG%---------37.5%-------------------------------45.5%
FT%---------77.8%--------------------------------50%
3pt%----------0%------------------------------------0%
rebounds----10-------------------------------------17
assists--------1---------------------------------------2
blocks---------4---------------------------------------0

Wow, 12 and 17 in the next game. That's nice. I notice that his FT % was 50 in both games, does this equate to 1 of 2 or.... like 5 of 10??

In other words, what kind of FT shooter is he?

 

[fnordius]

Wow, 12 and 17 in the next game. That's nice. I notice that his FT % was 50 in both games, does this equate to 1 of 2 or.... like 5 of 10??

In other words, what kind of FT shooter is he?

That was 2 of 4 in each of those games. And that's about what you can expect. His Washington FT record is 60% (323/534 over the course of 3 years).

 

[Kingster]

I didn't watch them, but maybe this will jog some memories.

1/10/08, Washington @UCLA
---------------Love--------------------------------Brockman
points-------11-------------------------------------16
FG%--------50%-----------------------------------50%
FT%---------100%----------------------------------50%
3pt%----------50%-----------------------------------0%
rebounds-----7----------------------------------------8
assists--------4----------------------------------------1

2/10/08, UCLA @Washington
---------------Love-------------------------------Brockman
points--------13------------------------------------12
FG%---------37.5%-------------------------------45.5%
FT%---------77.8%--------------------------------50%
3pt%----------0%------------------------------------0%
rebounds----10-------------------------------------17
assists--------1---------------------------------------2
blocks---------4---------------------------------------0

This year, he played very well against Alex Jacobson (Arizona) and Mike Dunigan (Oregon). He didn't do well versus Kansas, Florida Int'l, USC and Oregon State. He rebounded very well overall, but absolutely cannot block a shot (this year: 1 block per 337 minutes of PT). He's weak at the FT line. He's a good scorer as a garbageman, but has no range (3-point shooting in 2 years of college: 0-for-1). Basically, kind of like a shorter, thicker Jeff Foster.

Thanks for those stats. Just on the face of it, that is very impressive by Brockman against Love. Based on what you say above, it seems to confirm my impression that against certain players like Love he can be very helpful, but maybe against more athletic, quicker players he might have difficulty. Still, if Love starts killing us again on the boards next year, it would be nice to have Brockman in reserve.

 

[bajaden]

This all I have to say on Brockman. I watched him play a lot since he was in the Pac 10. I know everyone wants to look at how high a player can jump. What his reach is. How fast he can run, and then make a decision on how good or bad he's going to be. The problem is that were not talking about robots. Were talking about human beings.

Why does one 6'7" player become a star and another with all the same abilities, not even make the league. Its the same reason one person becomes president of the united states and another from the same college with the same degree and same abilities ends up collecting garbage. Its whats between they're ears.

Its about desire and heart, and Intelligence. Its about dedication to your goals. Chuck Person was one of the most talented big men to ever come into the NBA. He had it all! Karl Malone wasn't even close to the skill level of Person when entering the NBA. But Malone became a superstar and a HOFer. Person had a nice career, but was never a superstar and the only way he should be in the HOF is by visiting it.

My point is that you just can't look at physcial stats and decide how good someone is going to be. Especially when a player has already exceeded expectations at his last level. Brockman led the Pac 10 in rebounding two years in a row. He's in the rare company of Jabar and Walton. You simply can't ignore that.

I have no idea how good he's going to be and I'm not about to predict his future. I do think he'll make the team, simply because we have too many spots open and he comes cheap. So he's not a risky investment. But don't be surprised if he surprises you. he surprised me every time I watched him play, and I was usually rooting against him. One thing I know. No one liked to play against him. He was like a dull toothache. Always there, irritating the hell out of you. We'll see how that translates. But I'm not about to predict failure for this guy..

 

[HighFlyingMonkey]

Everyone knows that Brockman can rebound. That's the one college stat that faithfully translates to the pros. He's got the desire, the smarts, and the timing to make it happen. Nobody is denying that.

The true question is whether Brockman can learn all of the other staples of being a roleplayer to justify his presence on the court. Can he learn to make good decisions in a motion offense? Can he play solid team and man defense? Can he space the floor with a midrange jumpshot?

With Brockman, while the tangible measurements are not there, the intangibles are. It's the key roleplayer skills that will determine if Brockman sticks in the league or he just phases out like countless others before him. I wish him the best of luck, because God knows the Kings need a big with his rebounding prowess.

 

[SacTownKid]

Watched a replay of Washington and Arizona today, and I have to say, we got a steal at 38! He held his own against Jordan Hill and even beat him one on one in the post several times. Hill gave him trouble with his length but Jon was able to use the glass well and bank shots in that you wouldn't think were possible. He also just skied for rebounds left and right, and if he didn't get them he tapped them out.

 

[km23 mvp]

what a beast great player