I suspect many NBA heights aren't any more accurate.

DraftExpress, however, has a pretty extensive archive of pre-draft measurements. That'll give you a floor of a player's height (some players weren't done growing) for most players in the league.

I may actually be 5'11 something now--I was measured at 6' years ago but that can change
over time.

Just for starting the February thread, The District Attorney is considered a pretty strong candidate for induction.

Bill James on his paysite was saying that Al McGuire wasn't a great coach, and in attempting to prove the quality of Marquette's program pre-McGuire, cited the fact that Tex Winter preceded him as coach and Winter is in the Hall of Fame. I was like, I'm not entirely sure why Tex Winter is in the Hall of Fame, but that is probably not a good argument...

... but by god can I foul. I once scooped out an opponent's contact lens without actually touching his eye (which I guess wouldn't technically have been a foul).

That is indeed impressive. The best I ever did is cut someone's hand with my wedding ring while swiping for the ball.

5-9 -- legitimately -- and never have come close to the rim. However, I did teach myself to palm an NBA basketball. That's the upside of spending a lot of time waiting for players after practice next to the ball rack.

That is indeed impressive. The best I ever did is cut someone's hand with my wedding ring while swiping for the ball.

I'm still trying to figure out the physics of how the soles of both my shoes got blown out when I clotheslined a driving opponent. Served me right for playing so dirty, though.

I had that happen after a hard cut on a drive once. Think it's 'cause I had ###### shoes.

No MIA/OKC talk?

How many people in this thread could ever dunk on a 10' rim?

I am 5'3" (Yup, really short, like no kidding several standard deviations below normal), but it is a legit 5'3" (give or take a half inch). Go figure Mom and Dad both short (shorter than me even). And my kids will be taller than me, so there is some progress I guess. The oddest thing is for some reason people I know and work with often seem to forget how short I am, and I can tell when the suddenly are reminded of it.

And no never got close to the rim. Or the net. Or the top of that tall guys head. Such is life in Smallville.

Good to see that we are back to the "Who's better, Kobe or Lebron?!" talk thanks to Jordan. Yes Michael, five beats one- and seven beats five, so Robert Horry is better than you.

No MIA/OKC talk?


LeBron James is out of his ####### mind right now. I'd enjoy if he didn't just stare down officials and storm off like a child every time a foul is called on him.

Westbrook is playing well.

I still think the difference between OKC and Miami is relatively small, but Miami can just out Thunder the Thunder.

Tex Winter HOF:

All he really needed to make it was the triangle.

LeBron James (and Kevin Durant, to a lesser extent) are really making greatness look so easy. Durant had a very inefficient start, and has been going absolutely crazy the second half, and has 40 points with a good TS%.

James has 39/12/7, does everything for Miami (on both ends) and is shooting 14/24 (likely to break his 60 fg% stretch).

They're both playing at such a level that they're really *never* having bad games.

Both LeBron and Durant have WS/48 above .300.

Duncan, Garnett, Shaq, Hakeem, and Kobe have no seasons at that level. Most of them don't even have a season close. Robinson's best is .296.

It's just one stat, but both of these guys are having historically great seasons. And it's really early to be saying this, but I'm going to say it - Durant looks well on track to be a better version of Larry Bird.

The Lakers are losing 15-0? I guess I don't need to worry about staying up to watch this.

Clippers score the first 15 points of the game vs. the Lakers.

LeBron has just been absolutely insane, a player at the top of his game. But I still do think Miami is a beatable team. LeBron has to be playing at the top of his game. If he has a poor shooting series, they're extremely vulnerable.

So turns out Lebron is still amazing.

And now we get the announcers being silly saying how Jamal Crawford should be in the all-star game and how others think so too. If you seriously think Jamal freaking Crawford should be on the Western conference all-star team you know nothing about basketball.

And now we get the announcers being idiots saying how Jamal Crawford should be in the all-star game and how others think so too. If you seriously think Jamal freaking Crawford should be on the Western conference all-star team you know nothing about basketball.

that had to have been chris webber.

LeBron has just been absolutely insane, a player at the top of his game. But I still do think Miami is a beatable team. LeBron has to be playing at the top of his game. If he has a poor shooting series, they're extremely vulnerable.

i've come to terms with the fact that the sixers are not likely to make the playoffs, and they really don't even deserve to, but if they get bynum back and he's healthy and they make a run after the all-star break and sneak into the playoffs and get matched against the heat in a 7 game series, they could do some damage.


the heat do have a gaping hole at center, and noone is more likely to expose that than a healthy bynum. and with the heat also lacking a conventional PG, jrue might be able thrive over that series, too. the sixers don't have anyone who can really match up with lebron or wade, but noone does. they do at least have lavoy allen who might be able to make himself a couple more million dollars by muscling up on chris bosh the same way he did against kevin garnett last year.


it'd be a hard fought series, but in the end, i'd say sixers in 5.

DAJ managed to shoot something worse than an airballed FT.

Wait, did you just say the Sixers would beat the Heat in 5 games?

Also, if Spo does the right thing (in my opinion) and starts giving Birdman ~25 minutes a game the Heat are going to get even better.

DAJ managed to shoot something worse than an airballed FT.

his feet are too narrow and he shotputted it.

Wait, did you just say the Sixers would beat the Heat in 5 games?

it's always good to see fresh faces in the NBA thread.

Durant looks well on track to be a better version of Larry Bird

I don't think this is quite the right comparison. Bird was a MUCH better passer than Durant will ever be, as well as a better rebounder. Durant is the better scorer between the two of them, and a more efficient one at a much younger age (Bird didn't shoot 40% from 3 with 2+ attempts per game until his age 29 season), and certainly has a chance to have a much longer prime and better career as a whole, as long as he doesn't decide to do some paving at his mother's house in the offseason. Bird wasn't much of a 1-on-1 defender - I think Durant is certainly better there - but also did a great job filling passing lanes and breaking up fast breaks. I just don't see them as all that similar, though, other than the shooting percentages - I think they are both basically originals.

Durant looks well on track to be a better version of Larry Bird.

Durant is young and an incredible player, but he will never be the passer Bird was or the rebounder Bird was. Durant's AST% has been on the upswing, but it's still well short of Bird's career number. (And just by the eye test, Bird was one of the best passers of our lifetimes, maybe *the* best from the forward spot, with LeBron the only obvious contender who comes to mind.)

As for rebounding, Bird's career TRB% is 14.5. Durant's never topped 11.8.

I'm not really sure how they compare at this early stage in Durant's career on the defensive end. By DRtg Bird started off much better than Durant did but Durant seems to be catching up (and his DRtg this year, 101, matches Bird's career number).

All of which is not to say that Durant will not prove the better player by the time his career his over, by the way. Just that they strike me as pretty different players. I've always thought the advanced metrics understate the value of Bird's all-around game, but I don't have anything to prove that and I'm super biased.

PJ - I'll take a club soda with lime unless there's fountain coke available.

I've always thought the advanced metrics understate the value of Bird's all-around game, but I don't have anything to prove that and I'm super biased.

So do I and so am I.

I prefer to think of #573 as the second draft of #572. Just filled out the details a bit.

You did mention the 3-point thing, though, which I didn't think of. Bird arrived just a touch too soon on that score. If his career started a decade later he probably would have taken far more advantage of the 3-point line; it just wasn't as much of a feature in anyone's offense when he started, IIRC.

Ha, fair enough. And I agree on the three point thing - if 22 year old Larry Bird enters the NBA today he's probably shooting 5-6 threes per game from the start.

Donatas Motiejunas is giving HOU some quality minutes tonight. Really have to wonder why HOU hasn't placed more of an emphasis on playing their young guys this season.

EDIT: I guess almost the entire team is young, but what I mean is that I don't understand why guys like Motiejunas, Terrence Jones, etc. weren't given more rope.

Well as you noted yourself, it's not like the Rockets are playing oldies in their stead, they're playing guys 1-2 years older.

The dig on Motiejunas seem to be that he's way too thin to stand a chance at center or power forward, he's quick and has a very good shot for a 7 footer, and seem to have pretty decent post moves too, but he's going to let a lot of big men plow right through him.

He's not going to be a conventional type player it seems, which seem to fit right in with the Rockets I guess, a team of 4.5 unconventional players. PFs that don't rebound, SFs that is tall and lanky, C that has no post move but good at every else, and two guards that are a bit of both PG and SG .

I honestly don't know why McHale don't try to experiment with a few more matchup though, like playing Greg Smith at 4 or something, or like you said, try to get Montiejunas and Jones into the game more. Jones seem to be closer to a conventional PF I'd think. But I guess they probably saw in practice that they'll get destroyed on post up or something. though I guess given Houston's position it is somewhat understandable to not experiement too much.

On the other hand, I also don't understand why Houston seem to be unable to pull a solid pick and roll to save their life when they have 2 guards who's best strength is driving to the hoop. The thing with Houston right now is that when they end up in a fixed half court set the odds of them scoring drops like a rock. they'll end up lobbing some shot (usually by Harden) while guarded by like 20 people and predictably comes no where close to hitting.

LeBron is a beast right now. It seems like he's taken up the Harden strategy of only shooting 3s and at the rim, at least in this recent run. He would do well to keep going.

I'm 6'5" and used to be able to dunk like a ############. I could do 180s, I threw down a 360 in my prime. Dunking is pretty great.

Bird and Durant isn't a perfect comparison. I think mainly because of the passing. But Durant's getting a lot better at that, and his role in the offense has changed a bit with Harden gone. Also worth pointing out: Durant's age 23 and 24 seasons have almost identification AST% stats to Bird's 23 and 24 seasons.

I chalk up the rebounding difference mainly to Durant playing in a more athletic NBA. I think their defense is similar - at least based on what I hear from old timers about Bird. Both use their length to be better at defense than you'd expect (I think Durant's a legitimately good defender).

The scoring and shooting efficiently from all areas is the main thing.

Both LeBron and Durant have WS/48 above .300.

Quite the elite list. Only seasons all time at that level:

Kareem (3)
Jordan (3)
Lebron
Wilt

Other LeBron and Durant stats:

LeBron is +18 on PER vs. Opponents (32.6 v 14.6)
Durant is +19.5 (30.8 v 11.3)

I’ve seen the idea expressed on some other boards that, to the extent LeBron is presently being overhyped (YMMV), it is in part because his peers, as far as superstar talent, aren’t as impressive as the superstars of the early aughts. Thoughts?

aren’t as impressive as the superstars of the early aughts

Wait, what? Who? McGrady? Allen Iverson? Kobe and Shaq? Someone is seriously holding up the early aughts as a golden time for superstar talent? Spare me.

Ha, fair enough. And I agree on the three point thing - if 22 year old Larry Bird enters the NBA today he's probably shooting 5-6 threes per game from the start.

Yep, though not without cost (like less offensive rebounds).

I threw down a 360 in my prime.

I did that. Uh, on a 9' goal, maybe eight and a half. With one of those little balls. And barely.

I think the Rockets are doing a reasonable job with their frontcourt rotation. They've got a lot of interesting dudes and only so many minutes to go around, especially if they're worried about spacing. You could say Aldrich hasn't worked out, but he doesn't play much anyway and his size offers tactical value. I'm not a big Morris guy, but his 3pt% is in the high 30s - same for the starter Patterson.
To that end - remember how I talked up the Rockets' D league front court? One or two of Jones/Monte/Smith + Vernon Macklin + Tim Ohlbrecht + Hassan Whiteside? Wow. Seven big men have played for them and posted a PER for the season of at least 20.

Following is an edit:

I’ve seen the idea expressed on some other boards that, to the extent LeBron is presently being overhyped (YMMV), it is in part because his peers, as far as superstar talent, aren’t as impressive as the superstars of the early aughts. Thoughts?

I think they are mistaken.
Here's a follow-up statement/question: League quality is higher now than then (greater int'l presence, improved adaptation to rules like the three, etc..) and LeBron is farther ahead of the league than any of those dudes were in their day (the avg, not other stars). (If you want to say that LeBron has been overhyped *this week* due to a hot streak, I'd be more inclined to listen - but that's more a reaction to his being underhyped at other times.)
I don't know what the following means, but: I've never seen a player whose dominance was more self-evident.

I think the level of play is much higher now than it was in the early Aughts. Richard Jefferson was the 3rd best player on 2 time Finals team. I think generally the level of play gets higher all the time, but I think we are in particular in a golden age.

Chris Paul has a very good chance to go down as the best PG since Magic, maybe the best PG ever. Durant's a good chance to be better than any wing since Jordan (besides LeBron).

Howard, when healthy and motivated, is about as dominant as anyone non-Shaq division that was around back then.

Duncan, Garnett, Kobe and Nowitzki have all maintained extremely strong play during most of LeBron's prime. There are a ton of great point guards in the NBA right now. I don't see it, really.

I’ve seen the idea expressed on some other boards that, to the extent LeBron is presently being overhyped (YMMV), it is in part because his peers, as far as superstar talent, aren’t as impressive as the superstars of the early aughts. Thoughts?

Absurd. Take someone with LeBron's skillset and size, and he's going to dominate any era. In fact, he probably dominates more the further back you go. And as has been talked about here plenty, Durant really isn't that far behind him right now.

Howard, when healthy and motivated, is about as dominant as anyone non-Shaq division that was around back then.

I'd only argue this point. Prime Howard isn't nearly as valuable as prime Duncan, Shaq, or Garnett, right?

Generally, to the point, I think the late 90s/early 2000s was generally considered the worst stretch since the Magic/Bird era began, right?

I'd agree that the overall talent level is higher now than it was in the early 2000's. The early 2000's were pretty much the same as the 90's, where top teams had one or two superstars and not much else. Shaq and Kobe and...who? Duncan and Robinson and...who? The few deep all around teams (2000 Pacers and Blazers, 2002 Kings, etc) didn't win titles, so it didn't seem like many other front offices were trying to emulate them.

We're in the superfriends era now, where there's a lot more talent to go around and the top teams have a disproportionate amount of it.

And as has been pointed out, there was no shortage of great individual players during the bulk of LeBron's mid to late 2000's career. Guys like Duncan, Garnett, Dirk, and Howard were all still good enough to beat LeBron teams in the playoffs. And other guys like Kobe, Wade, and Paul just never got the chance.

Shaq and Kobe and...who?

For their first championship, the Lakers did have Glen Rice who was an excellent player. He made three AS teams and once averaged as much as 27 points per game.

Durant looks well on track to be a better version of Larry Bird.

I think he's more like a better version of Dominique Wilkins. He's Nique plus range and defensive discipline. Inside 20 feet both could get their shot off against anyone or get to the basket and finish with authority. Per 36 Nique averaged 25.2/6.8/2.5/1.3/0.6, while Durant has averaged 25.1/6.3/2.8/1.2/0.9. Durant is obviously better, largely because he's a much better pure shooter and a more effective defender. It's hard to compare them as distributors. Nique always shared the floor with Doc Rivers or Spud Webb, which kept his assists down and his turnover rate very low as well. Now that the Thunder don't have a ball-dominant backup pg or sg, the offense flows through Durant whenever he's on the court without Westbrook.

Both LeBron and Durant have WS/48 above .300.

Chris Paul is also knocking on the door at .297, after putting up .292, .284, and .278 in past years. His greatness continues to be somewhat overlooked. If Chris Paul had been drafted into the weak Eastern Conference to play alongside Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, Josh Childress, and Al Harrington, how differently would his career have played out? Would he have been to the Finals a couple times by now and be recognized as a top-5 all-time point guard? Would the Hawks have stunted his growth by having Joe Johnson act as the primary ballhandler, thereby preventing that young core from developing into a contender and depriving everyone of superstar CP3?

Side note: somehow the Clippers already have played 56 games, while the Heat and Knicks have played just 50. Seems like an unusually large disparity at the ASB, when I'd think the schedule-makers would want every team to be in roughly the same position.

Glen Rice was never excellent, was like above average and probably one of the more overrated players of his time. Also, more like an average player on that Lakers team, far far from a superstar.

This method isn't perfect, but when Neil Paine took a look at measuring league quality, he found evidence that the early '00s were far worse than now:
http://www.basketballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=944

He expanded that in this year's book and found a peak of about '85-'88 before expansion diluted the talent pool.

Durant's game reminds me of McGrady - gets to the rack, shoots 3s, both have long, lean bodies. But Durant seems to give a crap, not to mention has the good fortune of far better teammates.

[594] McGrady was an amazing passer/ballhandler though. McGrady was like a supercharged Penny. Unfortunately, he had the same weakness.

Note: I did not check stats so forgive me if I am proven horrribly wrong.

If you haven't already noticed, NBA.com has updated their statistical database quite nicely.

http://stats.nba.com/leaguePlayerGeneral.html

[593] Thanks for the link. It pretty much coincides with what I would subjectively think. The Celtics high ranking on the team list is a great feather in Garnett's All-Timer cap. By the way, how much autonomy do you and Tom have in deciding what you write for Per Diem (if you're allowed to share)?

Thanks to everyone else on the replies on the weak era question.

I think people subconsciously do what Jordan did when he picked Kobe over Lebron when they say the early 00s were some sort of Golden Era. They look at Duncan, KG, Kobe, Kidd, Nash, Shaq and Dirk with their MVPs and/or rings and think of what an accomplished group it is. Meanwhile, Howard, Paul, Durant, Westbrook, Harden, Irving, Davis, Griffin, Love, Williams, Melo, Wall, and others (especially Rubio) could still get to that level of accomplishment. Lebron, Wade, Bosh, Parker, and Rose all have varying degrees of accolades already, and they will certainly be joined by some others in that group. I'm sure there will be some flameouts like McGrady who seem like they can reach higher heights but get derailed, but there are enough candidates that I am confident we will look back on this era as one full of transcendent stars.

Chris Paul is also knocking on the door at .297, after putting up .292, .284, and .278 in past years. His greatness continues to be somewhat overlooked. If Chris Paul had been drafted into the weak Eastern Conference to play alongside Josh Smith, Joe Johnson, Josh Childress, and Al Harrington, how differently would his career have played out? Would he have been to the Finals a couple times by now and be recognized as a top-5 all-time point guard? Would the Hawks have stunted his growth by having Joe Johnson act as the primary ballhandler, thereby preventing that young core from developing into a contender and depriving everyone of superstar CP3?


I'm so impressed by Chris Paul. I will say, as great as he is, and he is great - I thought he had a level of explosiveness in his early years he lost after his injury. He's still so smart, so good, and quite athletic. He has the best handles of any player I've ever seen. But Chris Paul in 07-08 was absolutely insane. I remember watching him extensively in their playoff series with the Spurs and thinking that he was literally unstoppable. His stats right now are just as good, so I may be off base. I think that is because he's improved non-athletic parts of his game though.

Flip