share

Player Height vs Standing Reach

DefenseWinsChamps
DefenseWinsChamps's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/14/2010
Posts: 306
Points: 1015
Offline
Player Height vs Standing Reach

Random idea ... Rather than referring to players as 6'6'', wouldn't it be better to list a player's standing reach? Wouldn't that give a more accurate description of that physical trait?

I mean, Anthony Davis was 6'10.5'' at the combine, but had a 9' standing reach. Then, he would be 'taller' than Miles Plumlee who measured 6'11.75'', but only had a 8'8.5'' standing reach.

Everybody knows that Anthony Davis is extremely long, but that measurement would more accurately reflect his basketball length than his height does.

I know nothing is really going to change, but its an idea.


rileymcshea3
rileymcshea3's picture
Registered User
Joined: 03/31/2011
Posts: 1488
Points: 1489
Offline
I agree,you don't block shots

I agree,you don't block shots or rebound with your head. So scouts should be paying more attention to their reach on not their height

mikeyvthedon
mikeyvthedon's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/13/2008
Posts: 5606
Points: 13223
Offline
The issue with that

Is the accuracy of the "standing reach" coming into question at the draft combine. Many players apparently tank the standing reach to increase their vert numbers. Height without shoes and wingspan are much more difficult to fake and have less of a margin of error in the draft combine. I give a player an inch and a quarter to whatever they are without shoes. Yes, the game is played with shoes, just not always the shoes some of these guys wear at the combine.

Now, most people know I was always high on Andre Drummond, but I have to use him as an example here. Andre measured at 6'9.75 without shoes with a 7'6.25 wingspan. Amazing numbers in both. In my mind, Andre measuring 6'9.75 without shoes makes him 6'11 with shoes. His measuring 6'11.75 with shoes made people freakout, either calling him a 7 footer or questioning how he gained 2 inches. Well, my mind says, who cares what he measured with shoes at the combine? I do not know why they even feel the need to measure with shoes, just add an inch to an inch and a quater. When someone is impressed by a guys measurement in shoes and they add more than that, just seems sketchy.

The thing that got me with Andre was not that, though. It was his standing reach. He measured at 9'1.5. That is a little above average for a center, just have to say, I have a hard time believing Andre does not have more of a standing reach than that. For instance, DeAndre Jordan measured at 6'9.75 without shoes, had a 7'6 wingspan and measured with a 9'5.5 standing reach. I know that not everyone is built the same, but does DeAndre Jordan REALLY have 4 more inches in standing reach than Drummond? Have to say, question the accuracy in that and think Drummond may have tanked it.

The combine gives an approximation on most things beyond height without shoes and standing reach, I feel. Everything else has a margin for error and gives a gauge of what to expect, just should not be taken as an exact reading. Standing reach is something I wish every team would measure accurately and give to you, just do not think that the numbers listed by Plumlee and Davis are exact. Yes, Anthony Davis is way effing longer than Miles Plumlee, we know that by his wingspan being much longer. Now, am I sure that Miles Plumlee has a 8'9.5 wingspan? I am not. I think he may have tanked it to get a higher vert number.

It would be nice to have an accurate standing reach number, what gets me is using combine numbers as the gospel of what to expect from players. Drummond's vert numbers were less than expected, just find it hard to believe that if you gave Andre a 12 foot rim and asked him to dunk on it, think it is certainly possible. He would at least touch the rim. In the case of Miles Plumlee, what sounds better? Having a 8'11 standing reach or a 40 inch vertical? Just something to think about. If I could get a guarantee that these guys standing reaches are the real thing, than by all means use them like you mentioned using them. Since I do not necessarily believe in said accuracy, think that height and wingspan are fine by me for now.

DefenseWinsChamps
DefenseWinsChamps's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/14/2010
Posts: 306
Points: 1015
Offline
Nice thoughts - I hadn't

Nice thoughts - I hadn't thought of a player tanking in one category to look good in another.

One struggle though: Drummond's standing reach is not as tall as a scout would think (considering his wingspan), but his vertical was only 33.5 inches.

That means that even if he was trying to tank his standing reach, it really didn't help his vertical numbers.

TheLastWord
Registered User
Joined: 06/06/2010
Posts: 443
Points: 329
Offline
mikeyvthedon How do you

mikeyvthedon
How do you "tank" a standing reach? Bend your elbow and hope no one notices? He has a huge wingspan because he is massively broad, not so much having long arms. The 9.15 reach is 100% accurate.

If you still aren't convinced, look at the photo below of Drummond and Monroe standing back to back. Monroe has a 9.05 reach - exactly an inch shorter than Drummond as the photo would suggest. Same shoulder height, Drummond is a tad longer in the arms.

http://solecollector.com/media/sneakers/images/greg-monroe-nike-zoom-hyp...

tblazer
tblazer's picture
Registered User
Joined: 01/13/2013
Posts: 189
Points: 342
Offline
wow

Look at Andre's Legs they make Greg's look like sticks.

seniokas
seniokas's picture
Registered User
Joined: 08/15/2010
Posts: 240
Points: 540
Offline
Exactly

That's exactly what I thought when I saw that Harrison Barnes measured with 8'5.5 standing reach. That's not quite possible when you are 6'8 with 6'11 wingspan. He has good frame but it's not like he would have super broad shoulders.

Malcolmx
Malcolmx's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/19/2010
Posts: 707
Points: 1328
Offline
@mikevthedon you make a whole

@mikevthedon you make a whole lot of sense.

ShekiruBoom
ShekiruBoom's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/26/2010
Posts: 420
Points: 658
Offline
but thats because standing

but thats because standing reach isn't that much of a focus right now. if the main perception of size on the court changes from height to standing reach like the main poster suggests, no one would be faking their standing reach since it would be the same as decreasing your own height.

Ken D
Registered User
Joined: 01/25/2012
Posts: 8
Points: 8
Offline
Here's something to think

Here's something to think about though, which of the following 2 hypothetical power forwards would you rather draft?

Player A: Measured 6'7 without shoes, with a standing reach of 9'0
Player B: Measured 6'9 without shoes, with a standing reach of 8'8

Let's assume they both averaged the exact same blocks per game coming out of college.

Wouldn't you be more comfortable with Player B? I certainly would.

But if standing reach is more important than height then you should want player A.

DefenseWinsChamps
DefenseWinsChamps's picture
Registered User
Joined: 06/14/2010
Posts: 306
Points: 1015
Offline
I think most would be more

I think most would be more comfortable with the 6'9'' player because the category in our mind for good height is toe to head. I am suggesting we change the category in our mind to toe to fingers.

lalaila
lalaila's picture
Registered User
Joined: 07/09/2009
Posts: 1834
Points: 1351
Offline
actually BOTH Anthony Davis

actually BOTH Anthony Davis and Andre Drummond had surprisingly low standing reaches, with both AD standing with their arms up you easily can see their sick length..

but for comparison Cousins has similar length and his reach is 9'5 same with McGee,Jordan, Henson, Sanders

RSS: Syndicate content