"athletic" "unathletic" - please define as these terms pertain to basketball

[IthacaMatt]

His athletic ability was undersold due to his race. Can’t do what he did and not be a great athlete. Scored 30 points on game playing the whole game left handed. That was an NBA game, BTW.
Being able to jump really high or not doesn’t mean your a great athlete. Quickness is underrated as an athletic ability, in my mind, and more important than flat out speed.
Ask swimmers to do anything outside of swimming; good luck.
IMO, great divers are the best athletes, followed by gymnasts.

Larry Bird did not have great foot speed, and did not have great hops. So, if you measure "pure athleticism", he's going to come up short in those categories.

He had exceptional dexterity, hand-eye, great vision, great balance. Those were his athletic gifts. But if you rated his athleticism out of 5 stars, he's like a 3. He's exceptional at those 3, not just good at them. But he's missing too many categories to say he was an elite athlete.

There's no shame in that. That 1985 Celtics team was maybe the best NBA team ever, and nobody will say that Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, or Danny Ainge were great athletes. Neither was Bill Walton, after all those knee surgeries. The only plus athlete on that team was Dennis Johnson, and he's even borderline.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Agreed - there is a reason he went #2 in the draft. It was probably more an "athletic" based draft pick then skill based. Another reason the more athletic comparison to a #2 overall pick was insane (I know it was only one fan)

That being said, Marek deliver a solid workmanlike career. So not trying to slam him in any way.

He also was a helluva shooter, too.

 

[pearl31]

I'd take a mix of the two (kind of like Wisconsin).

Wisconsin has Johnny Davis and a bunch of “unathletic” guys

 

[Day2]

I keep thinking about Nintendo Ice Hockey…

 

[Capt. Tuttle]

Larry Bird did not have great foot speed, and did not have great hops. So, if you measure "pure athleticism", he's going to come up short in those categories.

He had exceptional dexterity, hand-eye, great vision, great balance. Those were his athletic gifts. But if you rated his athleticism out of 5 stars, he's like a 3. He's exceptional at those 3, not just good at them. But he's missing too many categories to say he was an elite athlete.

There's no shame in that. That 1985 Celtics team was maybe the best NBA team ever, and nobody will say that Larry Bird, Kevin McHale, Robert Parish, or Danny Ainge were great athletes. Neither was Bill Walton, after all those knee surgeries. The only plus athlete on that team was Dennis Johnson, and he's even borderline.

That is a narrow definition of being athletic. Of all of those qualities listed, I think the qualities you admit Larry had are probably the most important. Speed is over rated. The NFL has tried to have guys who could only run as WRs, but most weren’t athletic enough to learn the skills to play FB. Lots of guys can jump. Doesn’t mean they are a great athlete.
We will agree to disagree on the definition.(but I am right )

 

[IthacaMatt]

That is a narrow definition of being athletic. Of all of those qualities listed, I think the qualities you admit Larry had are probably the most important. Speed is over rated. The NFL has tried to have guys who could only run as WRs, but most weren’t athletic enough to learn the skills to play FB. Lots of guys can jump. Doesn’t mean they are a great athlete.
We will agree to disagree on the definition.(but I am right )

We don't disagree. Larry had exceptional physiological talent in certain areas that are "athletic". He used those skills to play basketball better than just about anyone. Those skills, shooting, his exceptional handle / touch and passing ability were other-worldly. What he could do with a ball, in his own way was kind of like Marques Haynes or Curly Neal of the Globetrotters. Larry played circles around other guys.

Plus, he had a killer attitude and intimidation factor that was off the charts. Larry Legend was part Bill Laimbeer and part Tiger Woods.

But other physical abilities that are more traditionally considered "athletic" may have been lacking.

 

[cliftonparksufan]

We don't disagree. Larry had exceptional physiological talent in certain areas that are "athletic". He used those skills to play basketball better than just about anyone. Those skills, shooting, his exceptional handle / touch and passing ability were other-worldly. What he could do with a ball, in his own way was kind of like Marques Haynes or Curly Neal of the Globetrotters. Larry played circles around other guys.

Plus, he had a killer attitude and intimidation factor that was off the charts. Larry Legend was part Bill Laimbeer and part Tiger Woods.

But other physical abilities that are more traditionally considered "athletic" may have been lacking.

Michael Breed, who is one of the best golf instructors in this country, was just talking about this same exact thing on PGA Tour Radio. He was asking if Jack Nicklaus was just as athletic as Tiger Woods and if Larry Bird was just as athletic as Michael Jordan. His point was, as yours, that part of being athletic is more than just being physical, but mental as well. It's an interesting concept, especially when looking at Jack and Larry, that you might not think that they could have been as successful as they were, but knowing their success, would they still be as successful today. It does put it in a different perspective.

 

[Goin' Deep]

Interesting comparison of Nicklaus and Woods. I would wager that Nicklaus at 20 was more athletic than Woods at 20. Jack played different sports(football/baseball) at high levels and settled on golf. Tiger, due to his Dad's influence was basically golf all the way.

 

[CusefanATL]

Speed, lateral quickness, strength, jumping, hand eye coordination, then we get into things like explosiveness, timing, and smoothness.

I remember comparing Cooney to my college friend who was strong and fairly fast and could jump - but couldn’t jump off a diving board and catch a ball while in the air.

finally a "strength"

 

[Sudano]

Every single player we have is athletic. Let’s get that perfectly clear.

How we use the words is all relative to a “baseline”. And that baseline is established through the overall pool of players in the chosen population. In our case, high level D1 bball.

edit- and of course, there is some subjectivity to this.

Athletic compared to what? My grandpa? or other players on a basketball court they'll be playing against,
to win games. It's disingenuous to make the baseline something other than their peers.

 

[IthacaMatt]

Interesting comparison of Nicklaus and Woods. I would wager that Nicklaus at 20 was more athletic than Woods at 20. Jack played different sports(football/baseball) at high levels and settled on golf. Tiger, due to his Dad's influence was basically golf all the way.

Yeah, but Tiger was a workout monster. He wasn’t just playing golf. I don’t know if you saw his bio, but his dad would have Tiger do Army basic training in the summers.

 

[OttoMets]

Is this really supposed to be a good faith question?

How about this, in 2016 we got 30+ minutes a game from Gbinije, Richardson, Cooney and Roberson. Our current guys who are getting 30+ minutes/game are Buddy, Jimmy, Girard and Swider. Are any of the current four quicker or stronger than the crew from five years ago?

2022: When Trevor Cooney Would Be The Most Athletic Player In The Rotation!

In hindsight, they should have put that on the poster. Do they still print posters?

 

[pearl31]

Is this really supposed to be a good faith question?

How about this, in 2016 we got 30+ minutes a game from Gbinije, Richardson, Cooney and Roberson. Our current guys who are getting 30+ minutes/game are Buddy, Jimmy, Girard and Swider. Are any of the current four quicker or stronger than the crew from five years ago?

and actually Roberson is a pretty good case study. General consensus seems to be he was/is very "athletic" - but how was he as an all-around, productive basketball player?

 

[Scooch]

and actually Roberson is a pretty good case study. General consensus seems to be he was/is very "athletic" - but how was he as an all-around, productive basketball player?

Roberson averaged 8.8 points, 8.5 rebounds and 1.4 assists per game that year. No one would claim he was an All-American, but those numbers suggest he was a decent "all-around, productive basketball player". Would we not want him playing the 4 on this team? I sure would.

I probably should have framed this more like-
Is it necessary for a team to be “athletic” to be successful in p5 hoops?

Yeah, you should have framed it that way, because your original framing was lousy and your participation in your own thread has been worse.

To answer your reframing: kinda, maybe. You also need to define "successful".

Can an unathletic team win the ACC? Likely not.

Can they win 9-10 games in the ACC and squeak into the NCAA Tourney? Possibly, if they're exceptionally strong in some areas.

Can that team win a couple games in the NCAA Tourney? Sure, if things break right.

Can they win the NCAA Tourney? No.

 

[HOFCeluck]

Wisconsin has Johnny Davis and a bunch of “high basketball IQ” guys

FTFY

 

[pearl31]

Yeah, you should have framed it that way, because your original framing was lousy and your participation in your own thread has been worse.

owch, that one cuts like a knife.
look all I know is that bum Boeheim better start getting some ATHLETIC guys on the team or we'll continue to get embarrassed by every ATHLETIC team we play

 

[pearl31]

Roberson averaged 8.8 points, 8.5 rebounds and 1.4 assists per game that year. No one would claim he was an All-American, but those numbers suggest he was a decent "all-around, productive basketball player". Would we not want him playing the 4 on this team? I sure would.

hmm, OK, so you'd take that Roberson all-around production over J.Boeheim's all-around production?
That actually tells me all I needed to know

 

[Scooch]

owch, that one cuts like a knife.
look all I know is that bum Boeheim better start getting some ATHLETIC guys on the team or we'll continue to get embarrassed by every ATHLETIC team we play

Be better.

 

[pearl31]

Be better.

Wait, what happened to your initial ultra-clever reply?

 

[Fat tire 13]

I keep thinking about Nintendo Ice Hockey…

Same analogy came to my mind. We have a team of all "medium" guys. Need a little more variety to be successful

 

[djcon57]

hmm, OK, so you'd take that Roberson all-around production over J.Boeheim's all-around production?
That actually tells me all I needed to know

Yes, because there’s more to basketball than just making shots.

the analytics aren’t even close. Roberson’s win shares are higher than current year Jimmy every year except his freshman year

 

[pearl31]

Yes, because there’s more to basketball than just making shots.

the analytics aren’t even close. Roberson’s win shares are higher than current year Jimmy every year except his freshman year

hmm, OK, so you'd take that Roberson all-around production over J.Boeheim's all-around production?
That actually tells me all I needed to know

 

[pearl31]

Yes, because there’s more to basketball than just making shots.

the analytics aren’t even close. Roberson’s win shares are higher than current year Jimmy every year except his freshman year

and no further thoughts on UNATHLETIC Wisconsin?

 

[pearl31]

I guess we could talk about UNATHLETIC St. Marys or UNATHLETIC BYU...

 

[djcon57]

and no further thoughts on UNATHLETIC Wisconsin?

nope, I told you they weren’t unathletic and you ignored it.

every one sees your trolling here yet the mods allow it...so whatever...im sorry you are bothered that some white players are unathletic as compared to other D1 bball players