Tyler Harris best vert on the team?

[Nader_uggghhh]

Almost meaningless is extreme. Again, verticals are overvalued, but less so on vertically challenged (very short) guards. That is not saying it’s the only attribute needed.

We use height as a proxy for ability to get shots off and defend, hence a very short guard that has good reach/wingspan and vertical, isn’t actually that short.

The fact you say it’s a trade off between a quick release and height (vertical ) contradicts saying a vertical is nearly meaningless. A 5’9” point guard with an extreme vertical is much more likely to be successful, as it negates the lack of height. Even having a quicker release would require great range if the vertical poor and not utilized on the outside shot, plus the release does nothing to in regards to the ability finish.

I’m uncertain how shots of Haliburton or Bolton come into a discussion of why verticals are more important to tiny point guards. But Bolton’s vertical is a big reason as to why he’s just as effective at driving as the longer Haliburton. Same with LW, who also utilized his great vertical to create space on perimeter shots.

I think he's trying to say that most good finishing PG's don't rely much on explosion. A good NBA example would be Kyrie using his footwork and timing. Ayo Dosunmu would be a good college example. I think his vert is less than 25 which is baffling.

Conversely, someone like Lindell Wigginton can access 95% of his vertical on a jumper but doesnt have the footwork or ballhandling to use his explosion to finish. Wiggs would blow by someone and then get blocked because his 2 foot gather would cost him just enough time to be ineffective.

 

[Aclone]

Dubar

Tampa.

Wait. Which team are we talking about?

 

[AuH2O]

Yeah 40 times are weird because you can be extremely fast and still suck at the game of football. I could care less how fast a guy can run in a straight line if he can't get open, make any sort of move to beat a defender with the ball or off the line, etc.

For verticals, you might be able to jump really high but don't have the coordination to do anything with it. Look at Zion Griffin as an example. That dude was pretty athletic but he really didn't know how to use it well at all. I bet he had a pretty high vertical. Then look at Deonte Burton as the opposite in how much body control that guy had.

I think the 40 time thing is a lot of completely bogus 40 times in HS and JC. That's why you want to get a reality check from track times. Doesn't correlate exactly, but gives you an idea if a time is realistic or not.

 

[Statefan10]

I think the 40 time thing is a lot of completely bogus 40 times in HS and JC. That's why you want to get a reality check from track times. Doesn't correlate exactly, but gives you an idea if a time is realistic or not.

Yeah those times are going to be more realistic, but still don't mean you're going to be great at football. There is a huge difference between being able to run fast in a straight line for 40 yards, and the situations you're in when you're in a live game. How many times do guys actually have to outrun players in a straight line? Not very often. I'd much rather have a guy that's quick and elusive, than straight up blazing speed. If you get a guy who has both, well you've found an elite player.

 

[cyclonespiker33]

One problem I have with alleged vertical measurements is that a true vertical is very different from a vertical on a dunk.

 

[AuH2O]

Almost meaningless is extreme. Again, verticals are overvalued, but less so on vertically challenged (very short) guards. That is not saying it’s the only attribute needed.

We use height as a proxy for ability to get shots off and defend, hence a very short guard that has good reach/wingspan and vertical, isn’t actually that short.

The fact you say it’s a trade off between a quick release and height (vertical ) contradicts saying a vertical is nearly meaningless. A 5’9” point guard with an extreme vertical is much more likely to be successful, as it negates the lack of height. Even having a quicker release would require great range if the vertical poor and not utilized on the outside shot, plus the release does nothing to in regards to the ability finish.

I’m uncertain how shots of Haliburton or Bolton come into a discussion of why verticals are more important to tiny point guards. But Bolton’s vertical is a big reason as to why he’s just as effective at driving as the longer Haliburton. Same with LW, who also utilized his great vertical to create space on perimeter shots.

Not to say it does not help, because it does. @Nader_uggghhh gets what I'm trying to say.

First, in order to use the full extent of the vertical you have to wait to release at close to the apex of your jump. To do that you are adding to your release time. Yes, there are guys that have the combo of length and vertical where that doesn't really matter how quick is release is, he'll still get his shot off. Kahwi is going to get his shot off when he wants against about anybody other than a Giannis. There is a tradeoff, and you see a lot more of these guards giving up height on release point in exchange for getting a shot off more quickly and only getting their feet a few inches off the ground by the time they release the ball, a la Curry (or Bolton and Haliburton).

Second, if you look at a jump shot, even if released at the apex of a jump, you can have a significant advantage in height, length, and vertical and still have a defender get a piece of the ball. A shot blocker can jump with one hand outstretched completely vertically, and can graze the bottom of the ball, while a shooter has to extend both arms, and by the time they release they still have slightly bent elbows, arms forward to an extent, and a portion of their hand above the bottom of the ball. So for the short guys it almost always makes sense to forego full utilization of the vertical in exchange for quicker release.

As for finishing at the rim, these guys are dealing with help defending bigs usually, so even a big guard with elite vertical is still not typically going to simply gather, rise up and finish over a guy. Most are much better served finding space, angles, and throwing off timing of a shot blocker with floaters, same-foot finishes, etc.

That's a long way to say I think it is a nice thing to have, but I don't think there are many opportunities for a 5'9" guard to utilize it.

Great for rebounding and shot blocking, but still overrated. A big vertical with a long time to load and get off the ground is pretty useless. Guys that can reposition and get off the ground quickly are way more valuable.

 

[AuH2O]

Yeah those times are going to be more realistic, but still don't mean you're going to be great at football. There is a huge difference between being able to run fast in a straight line for 40 yards, and the situations you're in when you're in a live game. How many times do guys actually have to outrun players in a straight line? Not very often. I'd much rather have a guy that's quick and elusive, than straight up blazing speed. If you get a guy who has both, well you've found an elite player.

Agree for sure, but I also say it's highly unlikely ISU usually has that many guys in the legit 4.4s. In the 2019 combine more than half the WRs ran slower than 4.50.

 

[Statefan10]

Agree for sure, but I also say it's highly unlikely ISU usually has that many guys in the legit 4.4s. In the 2019 combine more than half the WRs ran slower than 4.50.

Oh I'm sure there are a small amount of legit 4.4's, but even though some can run a 4.4, they might not ever get playing time because they don't know how to use that speed effectively.

 

[reignofthetiger]

It is. Zion Williamson has a 45 inch vertical.

That's the number I've seen quoted, which is especially crazy for someone that heavy. Off the top of my head, the most extreme vertical I've seen reported in the NBA was Shawn Kemp at 49".

 

[Statefan10]

That's the number I've seen quoted, which is especially crazy for someone that heavy. Off the top of my head, the most extreme vertical I've seen reported in the NBA was Shawn Kemp at 49".

That's very impressive. MJ had a vertical of 48 inches!

 

[Hayes30]

That's the number I've seen quoted, which is especially crazy for someone that heavy. Off the top of my head, the most extreme vertical I've seen reported in the NBA was Shawn Kemp at 49".

I thought Kemp was a 41" jumper.

 

[Stereotype]

Not to say it does not help, because it does. @Nader_uggghhh gets what I'm trying to say.

First, in order to use the full extent of the vertical you have to wait to release at close to the apex of your jump. To do that you are adding to your release time. Yes, there are guys that have the combo of length and vertical where that doesn't really matter how quick is release is, he'll still get his shot off. Kahwi is going to get his shot off when he wants against about anybody other than a Giannis. There is a tradeoff, and you see a lot more of these guards giving up height on release point in exchange for getting a shot off more quickly and only getting their feet a few inches off the ground by the time they release the ball, a la Curry (or Bolton and Haliburton).

Second, if you look at a jump shot, even if released at the apex of a jump, you can have a significant advantage in height, length, and vertical and still have a defender get a piece of the ball. A shot blocker can jump with one hand outstretched completely vertically, and can graze the bottom of the ball, while a shooter has to extend both arms, and by the time they release they still have slightly bent elbows, arms forward to an extent, and a portion of their hand above the bottom of the ball. So for the short guys it almost always makes sense to forego full utilization of the vertical in exchange for quicker release.

As for finishing at the rim, these guys are dealing with help defending bigs usually, so even a big guard with elite vertical is still not typically going to simply gather, rise up and finish over a guy. Most are much better served finding space, angles, and throwing off timing of a shot blocker with floaters, same-foot finishes, etc.

That's a long way to say I think it is a nice thing to have, but I don't think there are many opportunities for a 5'9" guard to utilize it.

Great for rebounding and shot blocking, but still overrated. A big vertical with a long time to load and get off the ground is pretty useless. Guys that can reposition and get off the ground quickly are way more valuable.

Vertical = leg strength x velocity. There’s a reason that the NFL uses vertices to grade athleticism.

 

[RustShack]

I mean bench, 40, vert, shuttle, all that is nice. Obviously you can be elite if you have those measurables(and size) to go with drive and passion. Sometimes it’s just effort and work ethic. Niang is a prime example of someone who doesn’t check the boxes and is just good. There are a lot of busts in the draft because all they did is check those boxes.

 

[AuH2O]

Vertical = leg strength x velocity. There’s a reason that the NFL uses vertices to grade athleticism.

Right, which is exactly why I said that is a very good proxy for explosiveness, and that it is important in that regard.

 

[JCloned]

I am excited to see him play, I was really bummed when he signed with Memphis. I think he will fit our style well and will be fun to watch - especially when he soars.

 

[Thompsonclone]

I’m surprised by the amount of people underestimating Dubar.

Dubar is a THT level dunker and that’s not a diss. He just isn’t as explosive as Bolton, Harris and Blackwell but he’s a better in-game dunker than Bolton and Harris.