Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

    Originally posted by owl View Post
    I pose this question. Of all the players that might be there, including Blair, who do you think will help immediately and maybe into the future? I believe Blair would be the best
    choice. As mentioned above he will not be a bust. He will help the Pacers.
    With Hibbert being a pressure point on offense and his ability to pass, Blair on the other side of Hibbert would be the recipient of passes or Hibberts misses.
    I thought that you or somebody else said that if you pick at 13th you expect to get a starter, I don't see Blair to be more than your 10th best player coming of the bench.(a Jason Maxiel tipe of player)
    Last edited by vnzla81; 05-31-2009, 09:07 PM.
    @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

    Comment


    • #32
      Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

      Originally posted by dcpacersfan View Post
      "Concerns" are enough to worry me. I mean I think a GM or coach has the right to be turned off by T-Will's attitude or some of his extracurricular activities even though in and of themselves they may not be worthy of a police report and thus concrete evidence.

      But it may not be that big of a deal as you are saying. As fans who aren't given access to interview T-Will or know much about him, it is hard to say how much of a risk he is if at all. But based off of even very vague rumors I have to admit it makes me leery.
      I agree with you, the whole point that I'm trying to suggest is that I am trying to find out what these "incidents" are that bring some concern to GMs that would draft him. I've read on DX and from Chad Ford that there are some "concerns" but do not know what specific incidents that they are referring to.
      Ash from Army of Darkness: Good...Bad...I'm the guy with the gun.

      Comment


      • #33
        Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
        I thought that you or somebody else said that if you pick at 13th you expect to get a starter, I don't see Blair to be more than your 10th best player coming of the bench.(a Jason Maxiel tipe of player)
        That was not me. I do not expect anyone short of Griffin to be a starter
        in this group. My point was of the players available at 13 who would help the Pacers
        the most immediately and possibly long term and I believe that is Blair.
        {o,o}
        |)__)
        -"-"-

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

          I am really concerned with his size. Why do you want your PF at the size of less than 6'6 ?
          His size really limits every aspect of what he can contribute. It not like he can run the floor extremely fast.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

            Originally posted by owl View Post
            It is hard to run offense if can't rebound the ball. The more possesions the more offense.
            Blair is a very good rebounder and I believe would be a great complement to Hibbert
            in some ways. I would be concerned about the slowness of the defense with him but
            I believe he is quicker than people give him credit. On offense I think he and Hibbert
            present two very unique bigs with unique skills sets. Blair just adds something that is
            sorely lacking currently.
            I tend to lean more this way when I think of Blair as well.

            Also, he measured out pretty well at the combine so size isn't really a problem. His measurments are nearly identical to Jason Maxiel and Paul Millsap - guys that many of us would love to see in a Pacers uni.

            Comment


            • #36
              Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

              I might be a minority here, but the idea of pairing Blair with Hibbert intrigues me, but not in the system we have now.

              I know we run a very up-termpo offense right now, but if we played more half court, does anyone else think a Blair/Hibbert combo could be useful? I know they won't be terribly athletic, or quick. However, I think Blair would be able to give Roy a little room to score more, while still intimidating other teams in the paint at the same time. The only comparison that comes to mind is Smits/Davis boys.

              Now, I know more teams are playing a faster, up tempo offense, so getting back on defense would be a problem against teams like New York, but I really want to see this team get tough again. I think we can score well now, but the defense needs help. Perhaps Blair could help that?

              Comment


              • #37
                Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                I'm in the same boat as many others. I like a lot about what Blair brings to the table, but I think he has too many limitations to really be a great pick for the Pacers.

                Here's why I don't like him:

                1. I think, in spite of his toughness and rebounding, he's a perpetual defensive liability. Ultimately I think perimeter-oriented bigs will go right around him and post players will shoot right over him. When he's on the floor, you're not going to be able to switch anything. He's going to be horrible at closing out on shooters and slow in rotating. He's a poor defender in space and is going to pick up fouls faster than Hibbert did last year.

                2. I don't think he's a good pairing with Hibbert offensively because they need to occupy the same spaces on the court to be effective. All of Blair's points on offense come from low post touches. He's a poor shooter, poor ball-handler, and poor passer. In order for he and Hibbert to be effective, you'd have to move Roy into the high post quite a bit. While he can play from that position, I think it diminishes him a bit as a player. Outside of getting the ball in the low post, Blair is going to provide less offensively than Foster. He doesn't shoot as well, most likely won't be as good of an offensive rebounder, and won't cut as well. There's certainly no conceivably successful offensive scenario with Blair and Foster on the court together.
                "A man with no belly has no appetite for life."

                - Salman Rushdie

                Comment


                • #38
                  Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                  Look, I love the fact that the guy has a Dale Davis mentality.

                  But how effective would Dale have been if he was 5 inches shorter? I mean, we're talking about a guy who's shorter than Reggie Miller.

                  Color me skeptical.
                  This space for rent.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                    Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                    Look, I love the fact that the guy has a Dale Davis mentality.

                    But how effective would Dale have been if he was 5 inches shorter? I mean, we're talking about a guy who's shorter than Reggie Miller.

                    Color me skeptical.
                    Because height doesn't matter, his length does. And Blair's wingspan and standing reach makes up for his lack of height. Do you play defense with your head or your hands/arms? He is one of the longer bigs in this draft.
                    I can see people being a little concerned about foot speed and defending screen roll. But in the post Blair will be able to use his leverage and strength to push guys furthur away from the basket. He also has the length to challenge shots adequately.

                    If you guys are waiting for the perfect defensive PF that can defend the wing, the screen-roll, switch with everyone, and the paint then make sure and get something good to read. You are never going to find that guy.

                    Of course there are strengths and weaknesses, it's the name of the game.
                    "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                      Anybody know Dale's standing reach?
                      This space for rent.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                        Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                        I can see people being a little concerned about foot speed and defending screen roll. But in the post Blair will be able to use his leverage and strength to push guys furthur away from the basket. He also has the length to challenge shots adequately.
                        But he doesn't.

                        I will say it right now for people who haven't really seen him play..Blair is a bigger defensive liability than Troy Murphy. He's as bad in the post as he is on the perimeter (hyperbolic, but possibly true). I think he has the potential to be coached up, but he will never be an intimidator on defense.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                          Originally posted by Anthem View Post
                          Anybody know Dale's standing reach?
                          I couldn't find it earlier. But here are some bigs in this draft for comparison.

                          Thabeet Reach 9'5" Wingspan 7'6.25" (Keep in mind, these are among the top 5-10 measurements of all time in both categories)

                          Dejuan Blair Reach 8'10.5" Wingspan 7'2"
                          BJ Mullens Reach 9'3" Wingspan 7'1.5"
                          Jordan Hill Reach 9'0" Wingspan 7'1.5"
                          Blake Griffin Reach 8'9" Wingspan 6'11.25"

                          Blair is dwarfed by Thabeet of course. But keep in mind despite giving up 8 inches in height, he only gives up 4.25 inches in wingspan and 6.5 inches in reach. And Thabeet is a very long 7 footer.

                          My thinking is even though Blair is only 6'6.5" in shoes, people should think of him more as a 6'9"-6'10" player because of his extremely long arms. JMO

                          Originally posted by imawhat View Post
                          But he doesn't.

                          I will say it right now for people who haven't really seen him play..Blair is a bigger defensive liability than Troy Murphy. He's as bad in the post as he is on the perimeter (hyperbolic, but possibly true). I think he has the potential to be coached up, but he will never be an intimidator on defense.
                          Are you serious? Troy Murphy can't guard anyone and makes absolutely no defensive plays whatsoever. He is by far one of the biggest defensive liablilities in the entire league!

                          I watched Pitt probably 8-10 games last year. Blair had 6 games with 3 steals or more, including 4 games with 5 or more. He had 8 games with at least 2 block shots. Is he the greatest defender there is, no. But he does make a lot of plays. Blair's only problem was foul trouble due to pick and roll defense. He defends the post very well.

                          Also, blocking shots isn't the only way to intimidate on defense. Ask players who played against Charles Oakley or Rick Mahorn.
                          Last edited by Taterhead; 06-02-2009, 01:47 AM.
                          "Don't get caught watchin' the paint dry"

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                            Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                            Also, blocking shots isn't the only way to intimidate on defense. Ask players who played against Charles Oakley or Rick Mahorn.
                            I saw him get routinely attacked in the post by all types of offensive players in college. If he didn't intimidate in college, he has no chance against bigger and better atheletes.

                            I will say he got into Thabeet's head though. That was awesome.

                            I'm honestly not sure if he's worse defensively than Troy Murphy, but I can't say for sure. I'm trying to level the thread here because it's easy to see the words "tough" and "rebounder" and automatically associate those with being an intimidator/good defender.

                            Blair's tough and a very good rebounder, but he is not a defender.
                            Last edited by imawhat; 06-02-2009, 02:39 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                              i don't think blair is necessarily undersized. there are players with comparable size who have found success playing pf in the nba (though more often in a backup role). from draftexpress' database (format is height w/o shoes : wingspan : standing reach : weight)

                              Code:
                              dejuan blair  6'5.25" 7'2"    8'10.5" 277
                              jason maxiell 6'5"    7'3.25" 8'11"   258
                              paul millsap  6'6.25" 7'1.5"  8'9.5"  258
                              brandon bass  6'6.25" 7'2.5"  8'10.5" 246
                              joey dorsey   6'6.25" 7'1.75" 8'11"   265
                              reggie evans  6'7.5"  7'2.5"  8'11.5" 250
                              ike diogu     6'6.5"  7'3.5"  9'1"    255
                              blair is on the short side but has long arms and a good standing reach. if anything, he's oversized in the weight department - he's a lot heavier than comparable players. will that slow him down unduly? that is probably the biggest worry concerning blair, and in fact others in this thread have made a good job of pointing this out.

                              for comparison, here are some current pacers' measurements.

                              Code:
                              murphy     6'9.75"  6'11"    8'11"    250
                              mcroberts  6'8.75"  7'1"     8'10.5"  240
                              dunleavy   6'8"     6'9"     8'10"    230
                              granger    6'7.5"   7'1.5"   8'7"     225
                              rush       6'5"     6'11.25" 8'8.5"   211
                              jack       6'2.5"   6'7.5"   8'4"     198
                              ford       5'11"    5'11.5"  7'9.5"   162
                              again, heights w/o shoes, wingspan, standing reach, weight. alas, dx doesn't have the measurements of foster, jermaine, or, strangely enough hibbert.

                              sizewise, it looks like blair or another of those "undersized" pf's are in fact about average when compared with our current front court. it's the speed issue really which is concerning.
                              Last edited by wintermute; 06-02-2009, 08:17 AM. Reason: formatting

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Re: Tbird 2009 draft analysis #4: DeJaun Blair

                                Originally posted by Taterhead View Post
                                Because height doesn't matter, his length does. And Blair's wingspan and standing reach makes up for his lack of height. Do you play defense with your head or your hands/arms? He is one of the longer bigs in this draft.
                                I can see people being a little concerned about foot speed and defending screen roll. But in the post Blair will be able to use his leverage and strength to push guys furthur away from the basket. He also has the length to challenge shots adequately.

                                If you guys are waiting for the perfect defensive PF that can defend the wing, the screen-roll, switch with everyone, and the paint then make sure and get something good to read. You are never going to find that guy.

                                Of course there are strengths and weaknesses, it's the name of the game.
                                I was going to throw some stats out there comparing Dale Davis and Blair but I decided not to. OF course its foolish to do so being two different eras but they are very close in statistical categories like scoring and rebounding.

                                I have no doubts that Blair will be a liability in some aspects but that doesn't mean he won't make up for it in other areas. He will quit frankly grind on the opposing teams big so much so that they will shy away if they are not mentally tough enough to hang in there.

                                Best way I could put it is that his mental make up will make him an over achiever. He can develop a face up jumper and possibly a 3 ball not because he is gifted but because he is mentally willing to work. In todays NBA I think that is sorely lacking in talented players.
                                I found this while searching for Dale Davis vertical reach:
                                http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-...&draft=30&sort=

                                Blair measurements Height with shoes. 6.65 (with out 6'5.25) Wing span 7'2 Standing reach 8'10.5

                                Average Standing Reach / Wing Span by Position ( this is drafted players since 1989)

                                Primary PositionSample SizeAvg Height w/o ShoesAverage WeightAverage WingspanAverage Standing Reach
                                PG1506' 0.48"1846' 4.6"8' 0.5"
                                SG1446' 3.59"2026' 8.1"8' 4.9"
                                SF1216' 6.18"2136' 10.5"8' 8.1"
                                PF2356' 7.70"2357' 0.7"8' 10.5"
                                C1186' 10"2517' 2.8"9' 1.7"





                                Primary PositionSample SizeNo Step VertMax VertBench PressLane Agility3/4 Court Sprint
                                PG12329.435.08.011.173.21
                                SG11829.634.910.511.353.23
                                SF10129.834.611.011.383.26
                                PF19728.532.812.811.723.32
                                C10126.730.611.712.153.43




                                Top 30 drafted players/postion since 1989

                                Primary PositionSample SizeAvg Height w/o ShoesAverage WeightAverage WingspanAverage Standing Reach
                                PG416' 1.05"1886' 5.1"8' 1.3"
                                SG386' 3.86"2046' 8.8"8' 5.6"
                                SF386' 6.56"2166' 11.1"8' 8.8"
                                PF506' 8.25"2367' 1.6"8' 11.4"
                                C286' 10.92"2537' 4.1"9' 3.3"

                                Primary PositionSample SizeNo Step VertMax VertBench PressLane Agility3/4 Court Sprint
                                PG2831.137.08.511.123.16
                                SG2730.436.110.711.113.19
                                SF3230.234.910.311.433.27
                                PF3929.233.412.111.643.31
                                C2327.131.010.712.153.43
                                Last edited by Gamble1; 06-02-2009, 09:40 AM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X