Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 24 of 24
  1. #16
    Wild 100's Go Getter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    The Wasatch Range
    Posts
    13,488

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Another thing, why are people saying that he had a "bad comdine." Did anyone watch it?

    I mean he could have had one in all honesty I didn't catch it but from what I heard he was pleased with his performance [yet ppl are saying he had a bad no step/sprint showing--for him].

    We could say that Rose was fatigued [from playing more basketball than any player his age for three straight years and injured [tendinitis] or at least not at the top of his game.

    I've converted. I reluctantly boarded the bandwagon.

    However I'm not going to sweat the stats or the hype...I'm going to give the kid an honest chance/eval.

  2. #17
    High School Varsity 6th Man entropy35's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    752

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    John wall has the edge in the physical measurements while Rose has a slight edge in the athletic drills (namely no step vertical, others were similar). Therefore i consider them pretty equivalent athletes.

    Can't wait till Washington vs Chicago, rivalry for the future.

  3. #18
    I don't get picked last at the park anymore
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    221

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Quote Originally Posted by Go Getter
    Another thing, why are people saying that he had a "bad comdine." Did anyone watch it?

    I mean he could have had one in all honesty I didn't catch it but from what I heard he was pleased with his performance [yet ppl are saying he had a bad no step/sprint showing--for him].

    We could say that Rose was fatigued [from playing more basketball than any player his age for three straight years and injured [tendinitis] or at least not at the top of his game.

    I've converted. I reluctantly boarded the bandwagon.

    However I'm not going to sweat the stats or the hype...I'm going to give the kid an honest chance/eval.

    I don't know if he had a "bad combine" or not, but his no-step vertical is somewhat artificially depressed by his horrendous technique in the drill IMO (as I outlined in Posterize'sDraft profile thread*, which btw, is an excellent read, and my favorite thread on these boards fwiw.) With better technique, he could have easily added multiple inches to his leap. His other numbers (39 max vert, 10.84 agility and 3.14 sprint) were all very solid to very good, and when you combine those athletic numbers with his physical attributes (his excellent height for the position, his extremely long arms and his solid frame that has plenty of room for growth (he's 196 currently), you have a physical specimen that few at his projected position can match (Rose is probably his only true equal, with Russell Westbrook slightly behind both.)

    It's important to note that both Wall and Rose PLAY UP TO THEIR ATHLETIC NUMBERS (actually, they both probably play above their combine numbers.) These testing numbers should only AFFIRM what you see on tape. You should never give the testing results more weight than you do on court prowess (like the OP does.) To say that John Wall "has no bounce" is probably one of the dumber things I've read in my short time on these boards (I've been a reader for a few months; a poster for about a week.)


    * http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...1&postcount=68


    Also, this is another exchange that I had with the Truth11 that outlines the simple correction in technique that would have increased Wall's no step (and by extension, explains the disparity between his no step and his max vert.)

    http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/sho...40&postcount=6
    Last edited by alexthegr8; 06-05-2010 at 09:27 AM.

  4. #19
    7-time NBA All-Star KG215's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    12,276

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Quote Originally Posted by Go Getter
    I still can't believe that Sonny Weems posted a 2.96 in the sprint.
    I know this is off topic and about a week old, but Weems had close to a 4.4 forty in high school. With his leaping ability, height, and speed, he could have probably made a good football player. He was a very good high school football player and had some offers to play in college. He's very quick and fast for someone who is 6'6".

  5. #20
    Now a Cavs fan again
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    1,003

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Yeah Wall is slightly overrated as a prospect, people acting like he's the greatest PG of this generation or something.... just ridiculous.

    Rose will be better than Wall and so far I've seen nothing from Wall to suggest that he can ever be a tier 1 PG.

  6. #21
    Wild 100's Go Getter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    The Wasatch Range
    Posts
    13,488

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Quote Originally Posted by KG215
    I know this is off topic and about a week old, but Weems had close to a 4.4 forty in high school. With his leaping ability, height, and speed, he could have probably made a good football player. He was a very good high school football player and had some offers to play in college. He's very quick and fast for someone who is 6'6".

    We [the Bulls] should have kept him.

  7. #22
    7-time NBA All-Star KG215's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    12,276

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Quote Originally Posted by Go Getter
    We [the Bulls] should have kept him.
    Maybe so, but Chicago needs a shooter at the 2 guard spot. Weems doesn't fit that mold. He's a freakish athlete who has developed into a very solid player, but at the same time I'm not sure he's ever going to develop into a starting SG on a contender. I think his ceiling is a reliable 6th or 7th man who's capable of coming in and locking down on defense for 3-5 minute stretches (ala Tony Allen) or being a scoring spark off the bench who can come in on any given night and give his team 15-20. If he continues to develop his shot and can become a 35-38 percent three point shooter then his stock will go way up. He's already developed a very good mid-range jumper.

  8. #23
    Wild 100's Go Getter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    The Wasatch Range
    Posts
    13,488

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Quote Originally Posted by KG215
    Maybe so, but Chicago needs a shooter at the 2 guard spot. Weems doesn't fit that mold. He's a freakish athlete who has developed into a very solid player, but at the same time I'm not sure he's ever going to develop into a starting SG on a contender. I think his ceiling is a reliable 6th or 7th man who's capable of coming in and locking down on defense for 3-5 minute stretches (ala Tony Allen) or being a scoring spark off the bench who can come in on any given night and give his team 15-20. If he continues to develop his shot and can become a 35-38 percent three point shooter then his stock will go way up. He's already developed a very good mid-range jumper.

    If we get a legit 2 in FA or in the draft Kirk can be the backup PG...Weems would have been [could have been] a solid backup 2...I mean with Thibs on board looks like we are going the route of a defensive team and Weems would fit [maybe].

    *Hopefully Kirk finds his stroke this summer*

    Oh well....just sucks to see a kid that you drafted become a venerable player for another squad.

  9. #24
    Not airballing my layups anymore
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    112

    Default Re: John Wall's "official" COMBINE NUMBERS are in

    Go Getter + TheTruth11= Same person

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •