Height/Athleticism or Skill/Shooting?

[tgan3]

The age old question, which do you think is more valuable honestly?

[mugiwara]

I personally prefer watching slower, highly skilled players. Guys like Nash and pierce, you can really watch what they are doing and implement some things effectively into your own game. Or say watching a team of older guys who have been playing together for 15 odd years, watching how they move the ball and rarely miss the open shots they always manage to find.

[mr beast]

if there's a choice, i would choose height/athleticism

#1 you cant train height

#2 athleticism can be trained but if you are born with it imagine how crazy you will get if you train it


skills/shooting can be trained and gained if you put in the work.



if it's just spectating a game, i agree with the above poster, i love watching teams with good skills and chemistry and their ball movement. it is pretty insane how efficient their offense are without the ball touching the floor

[bdreason]

Size is more dependable. Even good shooters by streetball standards don't shoot that high a %.

That said, I play the post, so I tend to look for a skilled guard who can pass/shoot to play a little two man game.

[NotYetGreat]

As said, height and athleticism can't be taught (athleticism, well, to an extent can be trained, but is restrained due to genetic limitations), but at the same time, in a pool of players that are all equally athletic, skill and shooting is going to be the deciding factor. Athleticism can fade though. You can improve it, but after a certain period of time (i.e. aging), you're going to lose sizeable amounts of it, even with proper training. On the flipside, game skills can only get better if you do train them properly, so I'm going with that.

[andremiller07]

Height alone by itself gives you a massive edge if you want to play pro ball it dramatically increases your chances because unlike the rest of shorter people 5'8-6'0 (which most people are) at 6'6+ you don't have to be elite like you would being a shorter person, topped of with athletic ability which is a insane advantage to him you can literally see tons of guys make it at the highest level due to both these gifts.

But personally I do prefer skill/shooting but yeah if I could go back in time and choose which I would want 100% height/athletic ability.

[Snoop_Cat]

In a pick up atmosphere, most definitely HEIGHT. When I play pick up, most people are typically in like 5'6" to 6'1" range more or less. When you have a big guy on your team 6'5"/6'6"+, that is a huge advantage as far as getting boards, dumping it down low, defense, etc goes.

Athleticism is nice and all but if you play with a team that is good on help defense and calling out picks and stuff, it can be mitigated. Height sometimes, just can't be beat sometimes if your team is short and the guy is skilled in the post.

[tgan3]

In a pick up atmosphere, most definitely HEIGHT. When I play pick up, most people are typically in like 5'6" to 6'1" range more or less. When you have a big guy on your team 6'5"/6'6"+, that is a huge advantage as far as getting boards, dumping it down low, defense, etc goes.

Athleticism is nice and all but if you play with a team that is good on help defense and calling out picks and stuff, it can be mitigated. Height sometimes, just can't be beat sometimes if your team is short and the guy is skilled in the post.

im 5'9. Ive played with 6'6 guys and they have shit handles and move so slow. Maybe the talent of big man in my area sucks but I totally decimate these kind of guys with my handling, shooting and speed.

Now if they were 6'6 and possess athleticism, that's a different story. But none in my area. The athletic guys are 6'1 and below here.

[Snoop_Cat]

im 5'9. Ive played with 6'6 guys and they have shit handles and move so slow. Maybe the talent of big man in my area sucks but I totally decimate these kind of guys with my handling, shooting and speed.

Now if they were 6'6 and possess athleticism, that's a different story. But none in my area. The athletic guys are 6'1 and below here.

Most likely your area (or mine). The court that I go to, there's usually a few big guys (6' 4/5" -ish) who, while not the quickest have the necessary big guy attributes. Strong, can anchor, reaction time, etc. One of my good friends is 6'5" and fairly large; when the other team's center is like 6'2" and weights that much less, it makes such a big difference, at least when I play

[D.J.]

Height/athleticism, because those can't be taught. You can teach anyone basic skills, but someone who's tall and athletic is at a huge advantage. The problem for the really tall is they're generally not good ball handlers because they dribble the ball higher off the ground. I'm 6'8" and while I had solid handles for a guy my size(I'm 35 now), it's much harder because I dribble higher due to my height. Not to mention smaller defenders are more agile and quicker on their feet. This is why I drifted to the 3. I'd handle the ball if ncessary, but it was in my best interest to be swingman since I was much more athletic than other guys my size.