Lance Stephenson vs Xavier Henry

Who has the better attributes?

Athleticism-

Size- Stephenson is powerfully built and functions best when he plays at 210-215, but he hasn’t been in game shape since the Summer League last year. Both have long arms. I think Henry just better though, he is prototypically built for a SG.

Defense- Henry gets the edge here. Henry is potentially a solid defender. Stephenson was a good defender in college and in the Summer League, but he adjusted poorly to NBA PG’s and SG’s, which was expected since he’s the size he is and since he’s young.

Strength- Stephenson is definitely stronger and more powerful, although Henry does have good strength for a 19 or 20 year old (cant remember how old he is) and has the frame to put on more weight.

Quickness- Stephenson is quicker. Henry is a long strider with middling quickness. Stephenson has good shiftiness.

Leadership- Neither is a leader. Stephenson is closer to the opposite of a leader though. lol

Jumpshot- Easily Henry, even though he struggled adjusting to it this past season. His main value comes in his ability to hit his jumpers.

Ballhandling- Easily Stephenson, who is a very good handler. Henry’s ball-handling ability is below average.

Passing- Stephenson get the edge. He’s able to play PG and isn’t a bad passer at all. He’s also more flashy with it. Henry is unselfish and makes good basic flow of the offense passes though. Henry is also probably a smarter passer.

Intangibles- Henry. It’s not a stretch to say Stephenson has the worst intangibles in the NBA right now. In fact, I’m sure some feel that way. Henry isn’t a headcase at all and is a willing worker by all accounts.

Who has the better attributes?

Athleticism-

Size- Stephenson is powerfully built and functions best when he plays at 210-215, but he hasn’t been in game shape since the Summer League last year. Both have long arms. I think Henry just better though, he is prototypically built for a SG.

Defense- Henry gets the edge here. Henry is potentially a solid defender. Stephenson was a good defender in college and in the Summer League, but he adjusted poorly to NBA PG’s and SG’s, which was expected since he’s the size he is and since he’s young.

Strength- Stephenson is definitely stronger and more powerful, although Henry does have good strength for a 19 or 20 year old (cant remember how old he is) and has the frame to put on more weight.

Quickness- Stephenson is quicker. Henry is a long strider with middling quickness. Stephenson has good shiftiness.

Leadership- Neither is a leader. Stephenson is closer to the opposite of a leader though. lol

Jumpshot- Easily Henry, even though he struggled adjusting to it this past season. His main value comes in his ability to hit his jumpers.

Ballhandling- Easily Stephenson, who is a very good handler. Henry’s ball-handling ability is below average.

Passing- Stephenson get the edge. He’s able to play PG and isn’t a bad passer at all. He’s also more flashy with it. Henry is unselfish and makes good basic flow of the offense passes though. Henry is also probably a smarter passer.

Intangibles- Henry. It’s not a stretch to say Stephenson has the worst intangibles in the NBA right now. In fact, I’m sure some feel that way. Henry isn’t a headcase at all and is a willing worker by all accounts.

 Athleticism– Wouldnt label either athletic, but Stephenson is stronger, and can throw down the occasional powerhouse dunk, so he gets the nod..

Size– They’re like the same size, give or take like 10 lbs, but Henry has ideal size for a NBA SG..i guess

Defense– I’ll say Henry, he’s ok…

Strength– Stephenson easily, dude is a bulldozer

Quickness– Stephenson gets the nod, pretty quick for a guy his size…

Leadership– Um….Lance is too immature to be labelled a leader, so Henry gets the nod..but hes no leader either

Jumpshot- Henry, kinda the reason hes in the league..

Ballhandling– now you know Stephensons from New York, right? That should answer it 🙂

Passing– Henry makes the right choices when comes to passing, so i’ll give him the nod

Intangibles– Henry

Pros & Cons to have either or on your team? dont see any cons with either except the fact that Stephensons maturity is one of a 12-year old…Pros, both big SGs that know how to play…

 Athleticism– Wouldnt label either athletic, but Stephenson is stronger, and can throw down the occasional powerhouse dunk, so he gets the nod..

Size– They’re like the same size, give or take like 10 lbs, but Henry has ideal size for a NBA SG..i guess

Defense– I’ll say Henry, he’s ok…

Strength– Stephenson easily, dude is a bulldozer

Quickness– Stephenson gets the nod, pretty quick for a guy his size…

Leadership– Um….Lance is too immature to be labelled a leader, so Henry gets the nod..but hes no leader either

Jumpshot- Henry, kinda the reason hes in the league..

Ballhandling– now you know Stephensons from New York, right? That should answer it 🙂

Passing– Henry makes the right choices when comes to passing, so i’ll give him the nod

Intangibles– Henry

Pros & Cons to have either or on your team? dont see any cons with either except the fact that Stephensons maturity is one of a 12-year old…Pros, both big SGs that know how to play…

I wanted Xavier in the T dot. I don’t yet know if I still do thanks to Ed Davis but I’m still waiting attentively to see Henry work out for Memphis. They didn’t need him last season anyway. He would have sat pine healthy or not last year.

I wanted Xavier in the T dot. I don’t yet know if I still do thanks to Ed Davis but I’m still waiting attentively to see Henry work out for Memphis. They didn’t need him last season anyway. He would have sat pine healthy or not last year.

 Im taking Lance Stephenson period point blank, the kid has more versatility then Xavier. He just brings more to the table. If u can get him to mature and buy in2 coaching uve got a really good player. I hope he gets it 2gether soon because i think he has the ability to be an above average player in the league, he has all the tools.

 Im taking Lance Stephenson period point blank, the kid has more versatility then Xavier. He just brings more to the table. If u can get him to mature and buy in2 coaching uve got a really good player. I hope he gets it 2gether soon because i think he has the ability to be an above average player in the league, he has all the tools.

I’ll try not to repeat what anyone else has said, even though I agree with some of it

Athleticism-In terms of leaping ability it’s Henry. He can get up for some pretty impressive dunks. Stephenson is long and fluid and is capable of dunking on people, but his conditioning hinders it. Henry would probably test out better in a combine testing environment because of his leaping ability and superior conditioning.

Size-Stephenson has better size for his position being a 6’5 combo guard who’s as strong as they come. He’s too strong for any point guard in the league if he can get a step on the them.Henry has adequate size for an NBA 2-guard with a below average overall skillset (ballhandling and ability to create shots comes to mind) for that position. He’s a 2/3.

Defense-Yeah Henry has the nod here. He won’t hurt you on that end and is a professional who will be in shape and give full effort. Stephenson’s defense was so bad last year in training camp that it made the local paper.

Strength-Stephenson. Henry has a great body for a 2 guard in the league already and almost looked he’d gotten to big before finishing high school. He’ll just need too keep making himself more efficient by getting stronger without adding too much weight. But he’s always been chiseled. However Stephenson is special in this regard. He can absolutely manhandle opposing guards.

Quickness-Stephenson, especially with the ball. Again, in a combine drill who knows. But on the court Stephenson has superior instincts to create space.

Leadership-Henry. He’ll never be anybody’s best player in the NBA, so he’s not a leader in that regard, but he sets a good example. I’ve never heard anything bad about this kid. Stephenson is just the opposite. The list goes on and on.

Jumpshot-Henry. A little unfair to compare because they take different types of shots, but shooting will likely be Henry’s calling card offensively for the duration of his NBA career. Stephenson is not a bad shooter, and is better off the dribble but is far less efficient ( shot under 22% from 3 in college). Stephenson has the better pull up and can hit tough shots, but once he gets adjusted it wouldn’t surprise me to see Henry consistently hitting over 35% from deep in the NBA.

Ballhandling and passing-Both easily Stephenson. His game is built for having the ball. Henry likes to spot up and doesn’t really have second moves to beat defenders when he’s forced to put it on the deck. Stephenson also has very good passing ability, as good as some point guards, even though he often waits until it;s a spectacular play to give it up.

Intangibles-I’d rather have Henry any day because I am convinced he’ll reach his potential. Lance is the better talent but i’m almost certain he’ll never be as good as he can be. You’ll always worry about his conditioning and off the court problems while Henry will come to work every day. Talent is not enough to deal with all the baggage.

Memphistyga i’m guessing you thought of this because of the other thread where we talked about Kansas recruiting both guys. It’s a good topic

I’ll try not to repeat what anyone else has said, even though I agree with some of it

Athleticism-In terms of leaping ability it’s Henry. He can get up for some pretty impressive dunks. Stephenson is long and fluid and is capable of dunking on people, but his conditioning hinders it. Henry would probably test out better in a combine testing environment because of his leaping ability and superior conditioning.

Size-Stephenson has better size for his position being a 6’5 combo guard who’s as strong as they come. He’s too strong for any point guard in the league if he can get a step on the them.Henry has adequate size for an NBA 2-guard with a below average overall skillset (ballhandling and ability to create shots comes to mind) for that position. He’s a 2/3.

Defense-Yeah Henry has the nod here. He won’t hurt you on that end and is a professional who will be in shape and give full effort. Stephenson’s defense was so bad last year in training camp that it made the local paper.

Strength-Stephenson. Henry has a great body for a 2 guard in the league already and almost looked he’d gotten to big before finishing high school. He’ll just need too keep making himself more efficient by getting stronger without adding too much weight. But he’s always been chiseled. However Stephenson is special in this regard. He can absolutely manhandle opposing guards.

Quickness-Stephenson, especially with the ball. Again, in a combine drill who knows. But on the court Stephenson has superior instincts to create space.

Leadership-Henry. He’ll never be anybody’s best player in the NBA, so he’s not a leader in that regard, but he sets a good example. I’ve never heard anything bad about this kid. Stephenson is just the opposite. The list goes on and on.

Jumpshot-Henry. A little unfair to compare because they take different types of shots, but shooting will likely be Henry’s calling card offensively for the duration of his NBA career. Stephenson is not a bad shooter, and is better off the dribble but is far less efficient ( shot under 22% from 3 in college). Stephenson has the better pull up and can hit tough shots, but once he gets adjusted it wouldn’t surprise me to see Henry consistently hitting over 35% from deep in the NBA.

Ballhandling and passing-Both easily Stephenson. His game is built for having the ball. Henry likes to spot up and doesn’t really have second moves to beat defenders when he’s forced to put it on the deck. Stephenson also has very good passing ability, as good as some point guards, even though he often waits until it;s a spectacular play to give it up.

Intangibles-I’d rather have Henry any day because I am convinced he’ll reach his potential. Lance is the better talent but i’m almost certain he’ll never be as good as he can be. You’ll always worry about his conditioning and off the court problems while Henry will come to work every day. Talent is not enough to deal with all the baggage.

Memphistyga i’m guessing you thought of this because of the other thread where we talked about Kansas recruiting both guys. It’s a good topic

Who has the better attributes?

Athleticism- Very close, but I would go with Henry as far as athleticism. He is a well conditioned athlete and has better leaping ability than Stephenson, but not by much.

Size- Another close one, but I would go with Lance, but only because he weights more (due to lack of condition). Lance was playing at 227lbs with Cincinnati (not sure how much he weights now) while Henry is around 215lbs-220lbs.

Defense- This is a hard one, because both didn’t really get extensive playing their rookie year so its hard to gauge.

Strength- I would go with Henry. Even though Lance has better size, Henry is a chiseled, muscular athlete. He is built very well and you can tell he spends alot of time in the weight room. But Lance plays with alot more physical style.

Quickness- I would go with Lance, and by a land slide. His first step is very explosive, and can be unguardable at times to go with his ball handling and size.

Leadership- None of them have leadership qualities, but I would go with Henry, due to better workethic.

Jumpshot- Henry

Ballhandling- Stephenson has ball handling skills of a PG.

Passing- Stephenson is the better passer, but Henry has the better basketball IQ.

Intangibles- Henry has better intangibles due to work ethic, and seems to be a student of the game.

Who has the better attributes?

Athleticism- Very close, but I would go with Henry as far as athleticism. He is a well conditioned athlete and has better leaping ability than Stephenson, but not by much.

Size- Another close one, but I would go with Lance, but only because he weights more (due to lack of condition). Lance was playing at 227lbs with Cincinnati (not sure how much he weights now) while Henry is around 215lbs-220lbs.

Defense- This is a hard one, because both didn’t really get extensive playing their rookie year so its hard to gauge.

Strength- I would go with Henry. Even though Lance has better size, Henry is a chiseled, muscular athlete. He is built very well and you can tell he spends alot of time in the weight room. But Lance plays with alot more physical style.

Quickness- I would go with Lance, and by a land slide. His first step is very explosive, and can be unguardable at times to go with his ball handling and size.

Leadership- None of them have leadership qualities, but I would go with Henry, due to better workethic.

Jumpshot- Henry

Ballhandling- Stephenson has ball handling skills of a PG.

Passing- Stephenson is the better passer, but Henry has the better basketball IQ.

Intangibles- Henry has better intangibles due to work ethic, and seems to be a student of the game.

I have just been disappointed in Henry up until this point because there was a lot of hype surrounding him.  He has looked soooooo one dimensional and even that dimension hasnt impressed.

Stevenson has had a lot of hype too and for quite some time, since he was like 14 years old I remember, but its easier to see why he has had problems, he just needs to mature.

Athleticism- Stevenson.  He is a better athlete than he looks.  Henry is stiff to me.

Defense- I dont know, I mean Stephenson is a scorer and probably doesnt pay as much attention to defense as he should.  One thing about Henry is he is pretty fundamental in that regard.  Guess I will go with X.

Strength- Lance. 

Quickness- again, quickness sometimes is more than athleticism, it could be because of ballhandling and scoring IQ.  As I said above, X is stiff and one dimensional…maybe coming off screens he is quicker but with the ball its Lance.

Leadership- Henry wins by default.

Jumpshot- here is where I will prob get some flak.  they are different types, set shooting, off ball movement, its X, but Lance’s shot is underrated I feel like Tyreke’s.  They are scorers that know how to put the ball in the hole.  Lance can have a really consistent jumpshot in the future, its just that fundamentally Henry is a jumpshooter but his shot is not very pure yet.

Ballhandling- this is where there is wide disparity.  Lance good ballhandler, Henry, once again, stiff and one dimensional.

Passing- naturally Stephenson…but X is a solid passer I think.

Intangibles- Henry doesnt cause much headaches or frustration but Lance does have some good intangibles too, like his confidence and heart.  His work ethic may be in question, not sure of his conditioning, which could be why he is lazy on defense.  On the other hand, I think Henry has lacked confidence.  I am going with a tie.

It depends on the team I had…Stephenson has the potential to be a bit more than a role-player.  Henry is just limited in a lot of areas but more solid, safe, and not as erratic.  It depends on the team, right now I give Lance the slight edge.

I have just been disappointed in Henry up until this point because there was a lot of hype surrounding him.  He has looked soooooo one dimensional and even that dimension hasnt impressed.

Stevenson has had a lot of hype too and for quite some time, since he was like 14 years old I remember, but its easier to see why he has had problems, he just needs to mature.

Athleticism- Stevenson.  He is a better athlete than he looks.  Henry is stiff to me.

Defense- I dont know, I mean Stephenson is a scorer and probably doesnt pay as much attention to defense as he should.  One thing about Henry is he is pretty fundamental in that regard.  Guess I will go with X.

Strength- Lance. 

Quickness- again, quickness sometimes is more than athleticism, it could be because of ballhandling and scoring IQ.  As I said above, X is stiff and one dimensional…maybe coming off screens he is quicker but with the ball its Lance.

Leadership- Henry wins by default.

Jumpshot- here is where I will prob get some flak.  they are different types, set shooting, off ball movement, its X, but Lance’s shot is underrated I feel like Tyreke’s.  They are scorers that know how to put the ball in the hole.  Lance can have a really consistent jumpshot in the future, its just that fundamentally Henry is a jumpshooter but his shot is not very pure yet.

Ballhandling- this is where there is wide disparity.  Lance good ballhandler, Henry, once again, stiff and one dimensional.

Passing- naturally Stephenson…but X is a solid passer I think.

Intangibles- Henry doesnt cause much headaches or frustration but Lance does have some good intangibles too, like his confidence and heart.  His work ethic may be in question, not sure of his conditioning, which could be why he is lazy on defense.  On the other hand, I think Henry has lacked confidence.  I am going with a tie.

It depends on the team I had…Stephenson has the potential to be a bit more than a role-player.  Henry is just limited in a lot of areas but more solid, safe, and not as erratic.  It depends on the team, right now I give Lance the slight edge.