WE DODGED A BULLET!

Does anyone know whether it was a wad of gum or a case of gum?

Sam

Sam wrote:And why is a player's height without athletic shoes important unless a given player is somehow mandated to play barefoot while his opponents scamper around in state-of-the-art athletic shoes?

It's an objective measurement. The heights at the pre-draft evaluation are actual heights, whereas the listed heights for most basketball basketball players are fictional. Most players inflate their height (like Barkley), although Bill Walton listed himself at 6'11 because he didn't like the idea of being a 7-footer (he was probably 7'1). A few players who jump to the pros out of high school may grow after their pre-draft measurements, but most don't, so it's nice to have an objective measurement of height and wingspan.

Outside,

Believe me, I thoroughly understand the rationale behind various height criteria. I am not talking about measurement objectivity. I'm talking about apples and oranges in making assertions.

I believe that, when assessing a player's height for the purpose of comparing him with potential opponents, it's irrelevant to bring up his height without shoes unless the heights of all his potential opponents without shoes are also cited. Wording an argument that way implies that the player without shoes somehow suffers by comparison versus other players with shoes. I believe it's just a way of slanting an argument; and that, by definition, is NOT objective. It's just a truism that's meaningless...a player is shorter with shoes off than with shoes on.

Moreover, I believe there's entirely too much emphasis placed on height in evaluating most players in the first place. I could go into great detail, but it would be patronizing to do so because the reasons are so obvious.

Suffice it to say that some players make it to the pros with height disadvantages, just as some make it with jumping disadvantages and some make it with "QUESTIONABLE BB IQ" painted on their foreheads. They get that far because of other attributes. Presumably their success or failure will depend primarily on whether those other attributes are impactful enough to offset their disadvantages. So assessing a player' chances in the pros based on an inch or two of height isn't really the issue unless he made it to the pros primarily because of his height.

Sam

I think 6'6" Chuck Hayes, the shortest regular season starting center in the history of the NBA, currently playing for Houston, is a good example of how "looks can be deceiving".

Doc was awed by Luke's efforts against Okafur in the NO game. Imagine Hayes, who is about the same size and weight as Luke, having to go up against Bynum (or Gasol), Nene, Chandler, Howard, Shaq, Bonner (or Duncan) and Lopez (either one) just about every night.

On the other side of the spectrum we have 7-footers Olowakandi, Oden and Bowie. NBA starting centers that could start their own kennel club.

bob

.

bobheckler wrote:I think 6'6" Chuck Hayes, the shortest regular season starting center in the history of the NBA, currently playing for Houston, is a good example of how "looks can be deceiving".

Doc was awed by Luke's efforts against Okafur in the NO game. Imagine Hayes, who is about the same size and weight as Luke, having to go up against Bynum (or Gasol), Nene, Chandler, Howard, Shaq, Bonner (or Duncan) and Lopez (either one) just about every night.

On the other side of the spectrum we have 7-footers Olowakandi, Oden and Bowie. NBA starting centers that could start their own kennel club.

bob

.

Bowie and Oden (so far) were severely hampered by injuries. They're not dogs. Bowie averaged 7.5 rebounds in 511 games played in only 27.6 min - that's a rebound every 3.66 minutes, excellent for a for a front-court player. And when healthy, Oden has shown he's a game-changer on defense. You want to talk dogs, talk about bigs like like Chris Washburn, William Bedford, Kwame Brown, etc., in addition to Olowakandi.

That's quite a list, what a bunch of losers. The 1986 draft certainly was a huge disappointment, Bias, Washburn, Tarpley, the list goes on and on. I don't put Oden on a list like that. The sin of it all is that I believe this kid could really play. I just don't know if he ever will again. Now I read that they are thinking of shutting down Brandon Roy for the season, his knees are a mess too. The thing is, they just signed him to a huge contract, and extended Oden, all that money and nothing to show for it. They wouldn't let Oden's contract expire and let him become a free agent, so they extended his contract. Smart????

So now I ask, what happens with Baby? His contract is up at the end of the year and what if there is a lockout? Does he shop himself and leave the Celtics? Doesn't sound like TA is extremely happy.

I suppose they must have insurance for these kind of injuries. According to
McHale, there was a question about Roy's knees when he was in the draft and that is why he by passed him.

s\s

News just in Rondo to play tonight!

Great, maybe the offense will look like it should

RosalieTCeltics wrote:That's quite a list, what a bunch of losers. The 1986 draft certainly was a huge disappointment, Bias, Washburn, Tarpley, the list goes on and on. I don't put Oden on a list like that. The sin of it all is that I believe this kid could really play. I just don't know if he ever will again. Now I read that they are thinking of shutting down Brandon Roy for the season, his knees are a mess too. The thing is, they just signed him to a huge contract, and extended Oden, all that money and nothing to show for it. They wouldn't let Oden's contract expire and let him become a free agent, so they extended his contract. Smart????

So now I ask, what happens with Baby? His contract is up at the end of the year and what if there is a lockout? Does he shop himself and leave the Celtics? Doesn't sound like TA is extremely happy.

I suppose they must have insurance for these kind of injuries. According to
McHale, there was a question about Roy's knees when he was in the draft and that is why he by passed him.

s\s

Blazers didn't extend Oden. They gave him a qualifying offer for next year of $8.79 million allowing him to be a restricted free agent. Oden can accept that one year deal or go free agency. It's a very reasonable thing to do with someone with his potential if and when he can get healthy. And it doesn't tie them up if he can't.