Physical attributes from the combine out

[Darkwing Duck]

Unfortunately, the source is insider, so I can't post anything about it or link to the place that posted them, you'll have to look on the NET for NBADRAFT to find them.

What I'll do is some comparisons. First is Aldrich vs. Monroe. Monroe jumped noticeably higher and benched more. Aldrich was faster in the lane, and same court speed.

Whiteside jumped higher than Monroe, benched between the two as well as lane agility, but was slow on the sprint.

Udoh jumped better than Whiteside, benched the same as Aldrich, and was the fastest and quickest of the four.

These test further muddle the field. Udoh was great athletically. Should move him back up the board, I think.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Wesley Johnson is a freak. Damn.

 

[billyshelby]

In other words, Davis and Favors are the only good athletes amongst big men in the top 10. More and more I'm beginning to think that the supposed depth at the 4 and 5 in this draft is a fraud.

 

[Qman]

Wesley Johnson is a freak. Damn.

Luke Babbitt 29.5 37.5 15 10.98 3.4
Wesley Johnson 32.0 37.0 16 11.43 3.14


Apparently Luke Babbit is a better freak.

John Wall 30.0 39.0 -N-a 10.84 3.14
Evan Turner 27.5 34.5 9 11.06 3.27
Xavier Henry 28.5 36.5 8 11.1 3.18
Jordan Crawford 31.5 34.5 7 11.03 3.37
Ekpe Udoh 31.0 33.5 10 11.15 3.29
Lazar Hayward 31.0 36.0 15 10.87 3.31
Patrick Patterson 28.5 33.5 17 11.14 3.25
Dominique Jones 26.0 32.5 19 10.88 3.31
James, Damion 29.0 33.0 13 10.89 3.2

All of these guys have incredible quickness and footspeed.

 

[NUMBERICA]

In other words, Davis and Favors are the only good athletes amongst big men in the top 10. More and more I'm beginning to think that the supposed depth at the 4 and 5 in this draft is a fraud.

Well, let's not get carried away. Athletic testing is somewhat subjective (it's not a real-game scenario) and it's mostly seperate from pure physical measurements and completely different from skill, talent, or IQ.

Besides, most of the bigs in this draft have ridiculous wingspan to height ratios. I'll choose height and length or hops, I choose height and length every time (though agility is a separate issue).

Every day I fall a little more in love with Wesley Johnson. He would be so amazing on the Jazz.

 

[Ferguson_Mellochill]

I think Luke Babbit could be worth a lottery pick. The guy has length, shoots, plays hard, has some IQ, etc. Nice rotation player, although not a real game changer, kind of a Mike Dunleavy.

I think in this draft though the Jazz have to go for athletic length--someone who can impact the game inside on both sides of the ball. I would take a long look at Hassan Whiteside. I like Greg Monroe and all, but see him as kind of a Marreese Speights--decent and maybe more skilled, but not a big enough physical presence to be a game changer.

I would actually look at the Euro Donatas Motiejunas, depending on his mobility and heart for the game. Very skilled player. I don't see the comparison to Bargnani, given that he's 30 obs. lighter and much more mobile. He could be more of a Toni Kukoc.

I think Cole Aldrich should be in play too, but I see him as a PF in the NBA--like a defensive-minded Kevin Love.

 

[Scat]

So is "30.5 34.5 10 11.73 3.22" pretty good for a skinny white boy out of Butler?

 

[Mambo]

Greg Monroe needs to get in better shape.

 

[mtnbayou]

I`d put money on Patterson having a better NBA career than Cousins

 

[Jazz4ever]

Cousins an Aldrich with awful jumping scores. Cousins at least has an excuse, he is out of shape. This might knock Aldrich off the Jazz radar.
Monroe pretty average on just about everything, as expected. Whiteside jumps pretty well for a 7 footer, too bad he's dumber than a box rocks.
The eltie big men athletic wise appear to be Favors, Udoh, and Davis.

Wes Johnson is a freak indeed, 32" no step vertical vs Turner's 27.5"...not to mention he is several inches longer. Who will be the better NBA player?

 

[NAOS]

Wes Johnson is a freak indeed, 32" no step vertical vs Turner's 27.5"...not to mention he is several inches longer. Who will be the better NBA player?

This will be one of those rivalry questions during the first year of their careers (and perhaps beyond). If Turner really does develop BRoy-like moves and body control, it will be hard for Johnson to top him, IMO. Johnson is an elite athlete, but he could end up something like Marvin Williams with a better shot.

 

[billyshelby]

This will be one of those rivalry questions during the first year of their careers (and perhaps beyond). If Turner really does develop BRoy-like moves and body control, it will be hard for Johnson to top him, IMO. Johnson is an elite athlete, but he could end up something like Marvin Williams with a better shot.

The Turner/Roy comparisons are driving me crazy. Roy didn't shoot the 3 his first 3 years at Washington, but when he did he was good. Turner has only reluctantly shot the 3 at OSU and never been good. Roy was not the primary ballhandler and averaged 4 assists. Turner handled the ball 90% of the time and averaged 6. Turner's rebounding numbers are impressive when you forget that Dallas Freakin Lauderdale is the only guy on his team capable of grabbing a board. And everyone saw what happened to Turner once the comp stepped up--points, sure, but the turnovers were off the charts.

Turner is going to be a solid pro. But he's going to be a massive 'bust' drafted at 2.

 

[MadMaxContract]

In other words, Davis and Favors are the only good athletes amongst big men in the top 10. More and more I'm beginning to think that the supposed depth at the 4 and 5 in this draft is a fraud.

There is DEPTH, just not greatness. At #9, the Jazz can count on getting a pretty reliable 7th man.

 

[NAOS]

The Turner/Roy comparisons are driving me crazy. Roy didn't shoot the 3 his first 3 years at Washington, but when he did he was good. Turner has only reluctantly shot the 3 at OSU and never been good. Roy was not the primary ballhandler and averaged 4 assists. Turner handled the ball 90% of the time and averaged 6. Turner's rebounding numbers are impressive when you forget that Dallas Freakin Lauderdale is the only guy on his team capable of grabbing a board. And everyone saw what happened to Turner once the comp stepped up--points, sure, but the turnovers were off the charts.

Turner is going to be a solid pro. But he's going to be a massive 'bust' drafted at 2.

Billy, you just aren't as sweet as you used to be.
I think the Roy comparisons are somewhat fair in terms of a single skill/attribute in which they have both excelled at their respective levels of play, viz. the one I mentioned in my post. If this is truly driving you crazy I'd recommend that you take a big dose of cialis and go to a club that always runs a valentine's day theme.

 

[billyshelby]

Billy, you just aren't as sweet as you used to be.
I think the Roy comparisons are somewhat fair in terms of a single skill/attribute in which they have both excelled at their respective levels of play, viz. the one I mentioned in my post. If this is truly driving you crazy I'd recommend that you take a big dose of cialis and go to a club that always runs a valentine's day theme.

I've got the Roy/Turner comparisons separated from my personal happiness just fine. But this is the place where these things get talked about. And when I talk about it, my opinion is that Turner is vastly overrated. I might turn out to be really, really wrong. I'll be here when he proves me wrong.

But I would say Top 3 picks in any NBA draft are always considered Can't Miss on some level. They're always guys that are thought will develop into All Stars. Everyone always wants to trade up to get one of these future All Stars. Without further adieu, here's the top 3 misses from 2006 going down, (misses defined as didn't turn out to be all that great):

2006: Morrison (3)
2005: Williams (Marvin) (2) (won't include Bogut, but he's hardly what you dream of as a #1)
2004: Okafor (2); Gordon (3) -- these are not bad players. They're not all stars. This is about what I expect for Turner. Both are disappointments relative to where they were selected, though.
2003: Milicik (2) -- unbelievable freakin draft this was
2002: Williams (Jay) (2); Dunleavy (3); and just for fun, this draft went Gooden, Jeffries, Wagner, a Greek Guy, Caron Butler, Curtis Freakin Borchardt, and THEN Amare Stoudemire.
2001: Brown (1); Chandler (2); and terrible Pau Gasol at 3
2000: Martin (1); Swift (2); Miles (3) -- the trifecta
1999: Francis (2) -- he was good depending on your perspective, but he sucked compared to my perspective.
1998: Olowakandi (1); LaFrentz (3)
1997: Van Horn (2)

In other words, at least one of every top 3 every single year turns out to be not nearly as good as advertised or a complete bust. Turner is my pick to keep the tradition going. Seems crazy now. But somebody is going to be that guy unless history changes miraculously this year.

 

[Siro]

I've got the Roy/Turner comparisons separated from my personal happiness just fine. But this is the place where these things get talked about. And when I talk about it, my opinion is that Turner is vastly overrated. I might turn out to be really, really wrong. I'll be here when he proves me wrong.

But I would say Top 3 picks in any NBA draft are always considered Can't Miss on some level. They're always guys that are thought will develop into All Stars. Everyone always wants to trade up to get one of these future All Stars. Without further adieu, here's the top 3 misses from 2006 going down, (misses defined as didn't turn out to be all that great):

2006: Morrison (3)
2005: Williams (Marvin) (2) (won't include Bogut, but he's hardly what you dream of as a #1)
2004: Okafor (2); Gordon (3) -- these are not bad players. They're not all stars. This is about what I expect for Turner. Both are disappointments relative to where they were selected, though.
2003: Milicik (2) -- unbelievable freakin draft this was
2002: Williams (Jay) (2); Dunleavy (3); and just for fun, this draft went Gooden, Jeffries, Wagner, a Greek Guy, Caron Butler, Curtis Freakin Borchardt, and THEN Amare Stoudemire.
2001: Brown (1); Chandler (2); and terrible Pau Gasol at 3
2000: Martin (1); Swift (2); Miles (3) -- the trifecta
1999: Francis (2) -- he was good depending on your perspective, but he sucked compared to my perspective.
1998: Olowakandi (1); LaFrentz (3)
1997: Van Horn (2)

In other words, at least one of every top 3 every single year turns out to be not nearly as good as advertised or a complete bust. Turner is my pick to keep the tradition going. Seems crazy now. But somebody is going to be that guy unless history changes miraculously this year.

First you say that top 3 picks are considered a "can't miss", then you show the majority (16 out of 30) were busts. Are you saying that NBA teams are wrong for regarding top 3 picks so highly?

 

[billyshelby]

I said they are 'considered' Can't Miss. I'm not saying NBA teams are wrong for regarding them so highly, I'm just saying they're often wrong. This year the NBA regards Evan Turner very highly. I'm saying they're all wrong. And they all know more than me. And they all have watched more games. But they're the guys who said all those other guys were going to be so great. And they weren't.

 

[Avery]

No such thing as a can't miss player, just players with less likelihood of being a miss.

I think Wesley Johnson is going to be the best player from this class and average 25 PPG for a long time.

 

[afrojazz]

Cousins is a head scratcher for me

I'm not sold on Cousins. He had a lot of trouble getting up and down the court in the NCAA--either due to conditioning or lack of intensity. He just does not hustle back on D. He often looked lost out on the court and is prone to mental lapses and childish behavior. He has gotten by on size and ability to this point. I don't think he is going to work hard and be determined enough to be a game changer in the NBA. I think he will be off the board before the #9 slot so the Jazz won't have to make a judgement on him.

 

[NUMBERICA]

Most of the time, you can't do in the NBA what you couldn't do in college or Europe. That said, I'm not sure how Turner is more likely to be a relative bust than Favors is.