A closer look at Bradley Beal

[Kouki]

There are a lot of solid players with a 6'9 wingspan. 6'9 is only one more inch than 6'8 and only one-half inch on each side (I'm an engineer just take my word for it). Is that really going to matter?

 

[Pioneer10]

Klay Thompson and Evan Turner both have wingspans of 6'8" and neither of them has struggled because of their size.

Avery Bradley was a great defender for Boston this year and he's 6'3.25" with a 6'7.25" wingspan

Style of play matters much more than the difference between 6'4" with a 6'8" wingspan and 6'5" with a 6'11" wingspan.

Respect your opinions a lot D-Wreck but to be honest guys like Turner scare me about Beal. Turner has been a flop and neither Klay Thompson or Bradley are stars. Also I think Thompson measured out at 6'9"

 

[Pioneer10]

There are a lot of solid players with a 6'9 wingspan. 6'9 is only one more inch than 6'8 and only one-half inch on each side (I'm an engineer just take my word for it). Is that really going to matter?

Doesn't seem like much but there appears to be a "floor" effect with wingspan. A long wingspan doesn't guarantee success but the percentage of players who are good SG's seems to drop pretty precipitously as the there length goes down. In fact the only true "star" who had a wingspan less then 6'9" at SG was Brandon Roy (may have missed someone else but that's what I could find in the DX database).

 

[Derek]

Respect your opinions a lot D-Wreck but to be honest guys like Turner scare me about Beal. Turner has been a flop and neither Klay Thompson or Bradley are stars. Also I think Thompson measured out at 6'9"

You're right about Thompson, must've been older measurements in the database. My point is, the whole concern with height is whether or not he can defend, Turner, Bradley and co haven't struggled because of a lack of length or size. Guys like Avery Bradley and Delonte West prove that you can defend at that size and Beal is larger than both of them.

The way they plays more important than an inch or two.

I mean seriously get out a ruler and look at how big 3 inches is, (resisting the urge to make jokes). Thats the difference between Lamb's wingspan and Beal's wingspan. Is that really going to make that much of a difference? The reason undersized guys have generally struggled is because they play smaller, Beal doesn't play small.

 

[Pioneer10]

You're right about Thompson, must've been older measurements in the database. My point is, the whole concern with height is whether or not he can defend, Turner, Bradley and co haven't struggled because of a lack of length or size. Guys like Avery Bradley and Delonte West prove that you can defend at that size and Beal is larger than both of them.

The way they plays more important than an inch or two.

I mean seriously get out a ruler and look at how big 3 inches is, (resisting the urge to make jokes). Thats the difference between Lamb's wingspan and Beal's wingspan. Is that really going to make that much of a difference? The reason undersized guys have generally struggled is because they play smaller, Beal doesn't play small.

At the NBA level, inches make a huge difference - like the difference between a guy like Randy Foye being a star versus a role player. In fact, beyond defense I'm worried about Beal's wingspan more with his ability to finish in the lane. That extra inch is the difference between getting a shot tipped versus going in. Not that he can't do it: Brandon Roy and his similar short wingspan would have had a fantastic career if his knees held up but it's a point not in his favor IMO.

Also the database is limited as we don't have measurements from players drafted more then 10 years ago, a bigger sample size may reveal the correlations aren't as significant as they appear

 

[Douglar]

I think the ability to play basketball trumps just about anythink in the end.

 

[The Process God]

I think the ability to play basketball trumps just about anythink in the end.

Just look at Kyrie. He is the kind of guy that will be breaking ankles at 35+ because of his body control and skill (especially ball handling) while the Derrick Roses and Russel Westbrooks of the league may be on the heavy decline in their early thirties (or, in Rose's case, in his mid twenties) due to slowing down. What I love about Kyrie's game is that it's not dependent on athleticism. He rarely dunks or gets by his man on athleticism. It's done mostly by skill. This is why Kyrie will be the next Nash in terms of longevity (and efficiency as well, I suppose).

 

[Derek]

At the NBA level, inches make a huge difference - like the difference between a guy like Randy Foye being a star versus a role player. In fact, beyond defense I'm worried about Beal's wingspan more with his ability to finish in the lane. That extra inch is the difference between getting a shot tipped versus going in. Not that he can't do it: Brandon Roy and his similar short wingspan would have had a fantastic career if his knees held up but it's a point not in his favor IMO.

Also the database is limited as we don't have measurements from players drafted more then 10 years ago, a bigger sample size may reveal the correlations aren't as significant as they appear

I think Randy Foye's skill set keeps him a role player more than his height does. He was an inefficient scorer in college, too.

I don't see Beal's size as a problem at all. He spent the whole year matching up with NBA sized SFs in the SEC. MKG, Jeff Taylor, Tony Mitchell.

 

[Damage]

FWIW

Brad Beal 6' 3.25" socks 6' 4.75" shoes and 6' 8" wing 8' 3" reach

 

[RTrees]

There is something to be said for how Beal uses his wingspan. Beal averaged almost two more rebounds per game than Lamb, playing in less minutes per game. He also averaged one additional free throw attempt per game, illustrating his willingness to attack the basket. They were also pretty much neck-and-neck in steals and blocks, with Beal gaining the slightest edge in both categories. I really like Lamb and have all season, but Beal showed himself to be a more well-rounded shooting guard, standing reach be damned.

I'm watching the McDonald's game from 2011, and just finished watching the Jordan Classic from the same year. I was curious about Beal's arm length after spending time in this forum, but watching those games made me much more comfortable on my hesitation to select Beal (because of his position). He looks great and does make the most out of the length he has. I thought the combine would put the fears to rest, and although I don't know if that happened, what you're describing must be the case. He has a length about the way he plays at his height. The rebounding numbers were already impressive, but if not because of height must be due to simple basketball brilliance. I'm really glad to see those two games by the way, if we select Beal I will not be scared of what happens next, I'll be excited.

 

[Derek]

Beal is 6'4.75" with a 6'8" wingspan and an 8'3" standing reach

Lamb is 6'5.25" with a 6'11" wingspan and an 8'5" standing reach


Not really much of a difference IMO

 

[Just Checkin]

Well, it's a shame that Washington is gonna take him.

 

[RedBlackAttack]

Well, it's a shame that Washington is gonna take him.

Not really, if it means MKG is left to us. I think Robinson goes No. 2.

 

[MrsCavelette]

I would absolutely love it if we got Beal and the biggest sleeper in the draft: Royce White. Both guys are combo players and would be a perfect fit in our offense. Something about White is extremely intriguing. Don't hate me, but he reminds me of a very poor man's Le***n J***s...

 

[The Process God]

I would absolutely love it if we got Beal and the biggest sleeper in the draft: Royce White. Both guys are combo players and would be a perfect fit in our offense. Something about White is extremely intriguing. Don't hate me, but he reminds me of a very poor man's Le***n J***s...

Awwwww! You said the LJ word! I'm telling! :chuckles: