Support NeoGAF

[nomoment]

I'm picking since 1995, because the big HS to NBA boom didn't really begin until post Kevn Garnett.

So far, I can think of:

Kevin Garnett
Kobe Bryant
Tracy McGrady
Jermaine O'Neal
LeBron James
Rashard Lewis
Amare Stoudamire

Can anybody come up with a complete list? I know I'm missing a ton. Can anybody list all of the busts?

 

[Ninja Scooter]

busts:
DeShawn Stevenson
Eddy Curry
Jon Bender
Tyson Chandler (though he had somewhat of a breakout season this year)
darius Miles
DeSagna Diop
Kwame Brown
that tallass redheaded white kid on Seattle
Korleone Young

 

[themadcowtipper]

busts:

Kwame Brown

He did not try according to my God and Yours MJ...and we all now how MJ feels about not trying...

So the MJ curse got him

 

[Cloudy]

Let's do this with college players too and see how many busts there are :lol

Fact: There haven't been that many HS players drafted in the first round (guaranteed money)
Fact: College players have failed at a much higher ratio then HS guys
Fact: An age limit is bullshit

Why not just fire bad GMs and scouts? :lol

 

[Ninja Scooter]

forgot to add Leon Smith, Lenny Cooke, and Omune Cisse to the BUST list. Did some google'ing and found that apparently Stephen Jackson came straight from HS. He'd probably go in the "inbetween or too early to call" list along with Al Harrington and the last couple years worth of high schoolers (Dwight Howard, Shaun Livingston, Telfair, JR Smith, Josh Smith) who could all turn out to be superstars or at the very least solid roleplayers (guess i'd put Tyson CHandler in that group too)

 

[Cloudy]

Other successes:

Sebastian Telfair
Al Jefferson

Also Curry, Chandler, Miles and Stevenson aren't busts. They're just not star players...

 

[Eminem]

yeah, chandler and curry are excellent role players. and both had great seasons this year(perhaps because it's their contract year).
if chandler started he'd average a double-double, easy.

 

[Cloudy]

Shawn Kemp came in after a stint at JuCo. Does that count? And he was a success even though he smoked/ate away his last few years...

 

[Eminem]

Shawn Kemp came in after a stint at JuCo. Does that count? And he was a success even though he smoked/ate/fucked(literally) away his last few years...

fixed.

 

[Cloudy]

I can't believe no one mentioned last year's #1 pick (Dwight Howard). He was awesome BTW

edit: Shaun Livingston was great too

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Other successes:

Sebastian Telfair
Al Jefferson

Also Curry, Chandler, Miles and Stevenson aren't busts. They're just not star players...

Curry and Miles are fucking busts. When you are drafted in the top 3, with the kind of hype they got (the next Shaq and KG respectively), and you don't produce much at all, thats a bust imo. Like i said, i'd take Chandler back because he's turned himself into a very good defender/rebounder (though his offense isn't very good). Stevenson hasn't done jackshit either. Sure he wasn't drafted as high, but he was still top 20 IIRC, and was expected to contribute to Utah because of how "NBA ready" his body was, yet the Jazz got NOTHING out of him. He might contribute a nice game or two, but any team can find a guy out of the NBDL to do what he does. He's a career 6 ppg scorer. For a first rounder, thats a bust.

 

[Eminem]

though his offense isn't very good).

well, it's not awful. like today, he played 26 minutes and had 15 points.

and curry was the bulls leading scorer this year until he went out in the last month of the season. i wouldn't necessarily call him a bust. if he regresses to last years form again next year, then yeah. but the way he played this year, he's not a bonafide bust.

 

[Cloudy]

Piston, my definition of a bust is someone who can't get another guaranteed deal after his rookie contract. For example, Joe Forte who went to and starred in college :lol

Hmm, I just remembered some more great HS guys from last year's draft. J.R and Josh Smith

 

[Eminem]

yeah, someone as stupid as atlanta may try and max curry after this year. i dunno if they still would take that chance after eddie's health problems....but they were talking about offering maxs to tyson and eddie

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Piston, my definition of a bust is someone who can't get another guaranteed deal after his rookie contract. For example, Joe Forte who went to and starred in college :lol

Hmm, I just remembered some more great HS guys from last year's draft. J.R and Josh Smith

A guy like Deshawn Stevenson is going to get a deal because there are so many teams in the league and the talent is diluted. Tierre fucking Brown being on an NBA squad proves this. That doesn't mean the kid is not a bust. Ask Utah if they feel good about wasting a 1st rounder on him?

 

[Cloudy]

Tierre was signed to a few 10-days before the Lakers just decided to give him money for being a nice guy. He made a few hundred thousand from the Lakers at most and that's only cos they signed him through the season. No one will ever give him "NBA money" though and that is what the age-limit is about :lol

Stevenson is good enough to be in the league and I hope the Lakers take a look at him

 

[Ninja Scooter]

Tierre was signed to a few 10-days before the Lakers just decided to give him money for being a nice guy. He made a few hundred thousand from the Lakers at most and that's only cos they signed him through the season. No one will ever give him "NBA money" though and that is what the age-limit is about :lol

Stevenson is good enough to be in the league and I hope the Lakers take a look at him

thats not what im arguing though. I actually agree with you on the age limit. But a bust is a bust. Hell, Kwame Brown is about to get a fairly nice payday as a free agent this summer. Does that make him any less of a bust?

 

[Cloudy]

He's still a huge dissapointment for where he was selected and the money invested in him but not a bust since he can and will produce servicable numbers for a team...

 

[Ninja Scooter]

He's still a huge dissapointment for where he was selected and the money invested in him but not a bust since he can and will produce servicable numbers for a team...

huge dissapointment=bust, no? isn't that almost the definition? sure he puts up servicable numbers, but you can get any NBDL scrub or 2nd round pick to do that, especially on a bad team. You expect more out of 1st rounders, is all im saying.

 

[DJ_Tet]

Yeah, I gotta agree with Cloudy here, even if you were the no.1 pick in the draft, if you play in the league, you aren't a true bust. Also, you have to remember how young these guys are when they come into the league, it's really easy to call someone a bust after two or three years. That would put these kids at 21-22 though, and they have plenty of time to "figure it out." A lot of people, myself included, thought Jermaine O'Neal was a bust, turns out he was just buried on the bench, and once he got a chance to play, he tore it up. This most recent class of HS, including LeBron from last year, are all playing incredible. Livingston, Telfair, the Smith boys, Dwight Howard, all put up numbers in their rookie year that Garnett, Kobe, and T-Mac would have killed for.

True busts are Chris Washburn, Randy White, guys you look at who were lottery picks in past drafts and you have no idea who the fuck they are. Rodney Monroe at 12 to the Hawks? Ok, great college player, played a little over two years in the league I think. I can't call anyone who plays 8-10 years a bust, no matter where they were drafted. Yeah, Joe Smith never lived up to his potential (blame his name I say), but he's still in the league, contributing and getting paid. Can't hate on that.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Wolves still haven't really given Ndubi Ebi much of a chance to play. I think next year we'll be seeing more of him. At least, I hope so, because every time he DOES play, he plays well. I don't see why they don't use him more.

 

[Bat]

I think NBA scouts/GMs are doing a much better job evaluating and developing HS players now than they did five years ago. If you look at the 2004 draft, the success (so far) from the high school rookies is pretty remarkable: of the 8 HS players selected, only two (Dorrell Wright and Robert Swift) have not produced. And one of those is a white stiff center, which is basically a guaranteed bust no matter where they are from (hello Andrew Bogut!).

In the 2003 draft, there are two first rounders who appear to be busts (Travis Outlaw and Ndudi Ebi) but both were taken at the end of the first round and there were a bunch of college busts before them (hello Reece Gaines!). In 2002, you only have one (Amare Stoudemire) in a draft where there are a ton of college busts. Picks 2-4 have been huge dissapointments (Williams, Dunleavy, Gooden) while Haislip, Dixon, Borchardt, Humphrey, Woods, Frank Williams and others have basically been the definition of busts.

Everyone rags on the HS players taken early in 2000 and 2001 (Miles, Chandler, and Curry) but the truth is that those were incredibly weak all around darfts. There are busts all around (way too many to list) so with the exception of two foreign gems in 2001 (Gasol and Parker) and Kenyon Martin in 2000, everyone got screwed over those years. Once you get to pre-2000 drafts, there is a very high success rate for high schoolers (undoubtedly because those players were stand out prospects).

So, in my opinion, those whole HS draftee bust is a big myth.

EDIT- Also, as was mentioned, some players who appear to be busts are just being benched by their teams. Everyone thought Jermaine O'Neal was a bust, but the moment he was traded to Indiana, he became a very good player. He didn't just get better overnight; he was just given a chance to play.

 

[theo]

AL JEFFERSON!

 

[Cloudy]

Travis Outlaw ended the season playing a lot and he looks really good. Dorrell Wright just can't crack the lineup on a contending team so Robert Swift and Ndubi Ebi are the only suspect first round HS players from the last 2 years. Compared to the college draftee busts, it's not even close!

 

[Sumidor]

In the 2003 draft, there are two first rounders who appear to be busts (Travis Outlaw and Ndudi Ebi) but both were taken at the end of the first round and there were a bunch of college busts before them (hello Reece Gaines!). In 2002, you only have one (Amare Stoudemire) in a draft where there are a ton of college busts. Picks 2-4 have been huge dissapointments (Williams, Dunleavy, Gooden) while Haislip, Dixon, Borchardt, Humphrey, Woods, Frank Williams and others have basically been the definition of busts.

Outlaw actually got a chance to play at the end of the year and impressed quite a few people. So I wouldn't say he's a bust at all. Again one of those, being buried on the bench things.

And I don't know why everyone says Jermaine O'neal just needed a chance to play, and that's why he's been so good in Indiana. He never really got a chance to play, because he was lazy, didn't work out hard enough, and didn't do anything to deserve time. The guy was a toothpick until he went to Indiana. Then he bulked up a bit and started putting some effort into the gym and things off the court.

Also I agree with whoever said, that if they are still in the league, you TECHNICALLY aren't a bust. Just because someone has a bunch of hype and doesn't live up to it, doesn't necessarily make them a bust. Cause seriously, with all the hype Lebron got, shouldn't the Cavs be in the playoffs, with the number 1 seed, and he should have already won a championship last year.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Ebi will prove you all wrong once he actually gets a chance to play... I think.

 

[DJ_Tet]

And I don't know why everyone says Jermaine O'neal just needed a chance to play, and that's why he's been so good in Indiana. He never really got a chance to play, because he was lazy, didn't work out hard enough, and didn't do anything to deserve time. The guy was a toothpick until he went to Indiana. Then he bulked up a bit and started putting some effort into the gym and things off the court.

Definitely there was more there than just "being buried on the bench." I was just trying to remind people that everyone thought Jermaine was a bust, when in fact 3-4 years often isn't enough time to judge a guy who is only 21-22 years old. Basketball players continue to improve generally until they are 28 or so, so while 3-4 years was enough to judge a college senior on if he was a bust, it often isn't enough time to judge someone who was 17 when they came into the league (like Jermaine).

 

[kgHavok23]

Other successes:

Sebastian Telfair
Al Jefferson

Also Curry, Chandler, Miles and Stevenson aren't busts. They're just not star players...

isn't it a bit early to declare Telfair a success?

also...i disagree again with curry being a bust. keep in mind i've had to watch him since he came to the Bulls. But just this past season alone would nullify his title of "bust". he had a nice breakthrough year even if it ended early. i don't know, when I think bust, i think of no success at all...role players are role players, just cuz u dont start doesnt mean u were/are a bust.

 

[GaimeGuy]

Definitely there was more there than just "being buried on the bench." I was just trying to remind people that everyone thought Jermaine was a bust, when in fact 3-4 years often isn't enough time to judge a guy who is only 21-22 years old. Basketball players continue to improve generally until they are 28 or so, so while 3-4 years was enough to judge a college senior on if he was a bust, it often isn't enough time to judge someone who was 17 when they came into the league (like Jermaine).

And then some of the really good players continue to improve. (KG added a hook shot to his offense this year. For some reason or another, he rarely used it after the first 25 games, though)

 

[DJ_Tet]

Well the rare continue to improve. KG might be in that category, but how old is he? 28? 29?

It's not like he was 32 and added a killer turn around jumper (god, I really don't want to talk about him).

 

[Shinobi]

And one of those is a white stiff center, which is basically a guaranteed bust no matter where they are from (hello Andrew Bogut!).

"I'm not a stiff...I got my own card!"

"WHHHAAAAAAAAAT?!?"

Also I agree with whoever said, that if they are still in the league, you TECHNICALLY aren't a bust. Just because someone has a bunch of hype and doesn't live up to it, doesn't necessarily make them a bust. Cause seriously, with all the hype Lebron got, shouldn't the Cavs be in the playoffs, with the number 1 seed, and he should have already won a championship last year.

If you buy into the idea that one player can carry a team on his back to glory, then sure. But in a league full of stud swingmen, that just isn't likely. Even Michael Jordan didn't win a title by himself, and he's the closest we've seen to a small guy doing just that (well, Isiah Thomas was probably just as important to the Pistons).

Stud big men make a far bigger impact on a team in today's NBA, because there are less of 'em. This is easy to see with Shaq...while he wasn't the only piece the Lakers lost, he was easily the biggest, and their record basically speaks for themselves. On the flipside the Heat (who were already an up and coming team) have now emerged into a potential powerhouse.

Here's the bottom line with Lebron...did ANYONE suspect that he would become one of three players in NBA history to average 20, 5 and 5 in his rookie year, the other two being Oscar Robertson and Michael Jordan? I doubt it. And did anyone suspect that Lebron would average 27, 7 and 7 on 47% shooting in his sophomore year, while ranking in the top five in 14 statistical categories and 18 catogries in the top ten? Again, I doubt it.

'Bron hasn't just met or exceeded the hype, he's obliterated it. Can't blame him for having braindead, fanboy-like ownership.

It's not like he was 32 and added a killer turn around jumper (god, I really don't want to talk about him).

:lol Or dramatically improved his three point shooting...

"All in a days work..."

 

[Bat]

:lol Or dramatically improved his three point shooting...

[IMG]http://www.floydjohnsonstudio.com/jordan.jpg

"All in a days work..."

Sorry to be a myth buster, but that is incorrect. Jordan dramatically improved his three point shooting in 94-97 (to .500, .427, and .374), but that was because the NBA moved in the three point line to a very close 22 feet. When they moved the three point line back, he returned to his subpar three point shooting ways (.238 in 97-98). He didn't actually get more range or anything.

 

[Shinobi]

WTF...I always thought he'd shot 36-38% in the '98 season. Christ, checking the stats page he shot better from behind the line in his final season :lol...wierd. Anyway beyond that your point is made, though I'm sure Loki will tell you otherwise. :lol

 

[Loki]

Bat is correct about the 3-point shooting (which Jordan was never great at, though he hit a ton of them when needed in the clutch), but I also have to be a myth-buster, this time dispelling DJ_Tet's misconceptions:


Jordan's jumper from 19 feet and in was MONEY from the moment he stepped into the league. Orders of magnitude better than any of the stars today with the exception of Ray Allen and Dirk. I suggest that people who don't believe me go watch some games from '85-'88. His midrange jumper made the rest of his offensive game, and he scored a ton more than people think off midrange J's (off pick&rolls, off curls, off baseline screens etc.). Hell, he even had the turnaround J in the post from about '87 onward.


Anyone who parrots the "conventional wisdom" about the weakness of his jumper pre-1990 is kidding themselves, and it's obvious that they've never watched the actual games, since I have about 90 games on tape/DVD pre-1989, and in every one his jumper was incredibly consistent. What the media got hung up on (which subsequently became lore) is that, post-'92, his GAME changed to include much more jump-shooting (mostly from the post) than previously, though it was only after the first retirement that his game became, say, 75% jumpers and 25% drives (80-20 by '98), whereas pre-retirement it was around 60-40. He also extended his effective range to about 22 feet by '96. But I have the Sports Illustrated "Man of the Year" issue in my drawer from 1990, when MJ won the award, and SI called him (in 1990, mind you) "the most consistent jump-shooter in the league", saying that though Bird still had the advantage from deep, "from 20 feet and in, Jordan is automatic." 1990. Not "post-'92."


I'm telling you guys-- don't be deceived. Don't just parrot what the media has said, because I'll be glad to lend you the games so you can see for yourself. It's annoying that they continually repeat this theme when there's not a shred of truth to it, as if pre-'92 he bricked every jumper he took. News flash: a player doesn't shoot 52.5% over the course of their first seven seasons by bricking jumpers, I don't care how many drives/dunks he had.

 

[Cubsfan23]

Bat is correct about the 3-point shooting (which Jordan was never great at, though he hit a ton of them when needed in the clutch), but I also have to be a myth-buster, this time dispelling DJ_Tet's misconceptions:


Jordan's jumper from 19 feet and in was MONEY from the moment he stepped into the league. Orders of magnitude better than any of the stars today with the exception of Ray Allen and Dirk. I suggest that people who don't believe me go watch some games from '85-'88. His midrange jumper made the rest of his offensive game, and he scored a ton more than people think off midrange J's (off pick&rolls, off curls, off baseline screens etc.). Hell, he even had the turnaround J in the post from about '87 onward.


Anyone who parrots the "conventional wisdom" about the weakness of his jumper pre-1990 is kidding themselves, and it's obvious that they've never watched the actual games, since I have about 90 games on tape/DVD pre-1989, and in every one his jumper was incredibly consistent. What the media got hung up on (which subsequently became lore) is that, post-'92, his GAME changed to include much more jump-shooting (mostly from the post) than previously, though it was only after the first retirement that his game became, say, 75% jumpers and 25% drives (80-20 by '98), whereas pre-retirement it was around 60-40. He also extended his effective range to about 22 feet by '96. But I have the Sports Illustrated "Man of the Year" issue in my drawer from 1990, when MJ won the award, and SI called him (in 1990, mind you) "the most consistent jump-shooter in the league", saying that though Bird still had the advantage from deep, "from 20 feet and in, Jordan is automatic." 1990. Not "post-'92."


I'm telling you guys-- don't be deceived. Don't just parrot what the media has said, because I'll be glad to lend you the games so you can see for yourself. It's annoying that they continually repeat this theme when there's not a shred of truth to it, as if pre-'92 he bricked every jumper he took. News flash: a player doesn't shoot 52.5% over the course of their first seven seasons by bricking jumpers, I don't care how many drives/dunks he had.

If only the Internet allowed virtual hugs........

 

[Cloudy]

and SI called him (in 1990, mind you) "the most consistent jump-shooter in the league", saying that though Bird still had the advantage from deep,

Don't just parrot what the media has said

MJ was a great shooter but why is he being discussed in this thread? :lol

 

[Loki]

MJ was a great shooter but why is he being discussed in this thread? :lol

I dunno, but at least for once I didn't bring it up. I was just clearing some things up.

 

[Boomer]

Moses Malone!

 

[Loki]

Moses Malone!

Very true-- he started it all off. I'm reasonably certain he was the first HS-to-pro player. Though other legends like Kareem or Wilt could have certainly made the jump from HS, it was frowned upon at the time.

 

[DJ_Tet]

I never said Jordan couldn't shoot a jumper. I said he added a deadly turn-around to his arsenal.

Besides, he shouldn't have been talked about, I'm pretty sure he went to college


edit- Just to reiterate, I agree that Jordan's mid-range jumper was key to his development. In the early days, people feared his speed and leaping, so the wouldn't fight over screens for him. They would play back, and if Jordan hadn't been able to hit that wide open 14 footer, well, he wouldn't have been Jordan.

 

[Incognito]

You assholes mentioning Robert Swift of Seattle, are you forgetting that some HS prospects need to be planted and groomed before they begin to bloom and flourish? I think so. When I look at my growing garden, I'm reminded of Swift: a flower in growth who'll produce beautiful results very soon.

Recognize. W3RD.

 

[Bat]

Loki, I think he was referring to his turn around/fade away jump shot on the post, which he really did develop later in his career, mostly because he didn't need it earlier. He was always deadly from mid range, though, no questions asked. But his post game improved tremendously after his first retirement, and I think that is what DJ_Tet is referring to.

It always struck me as odd that Jordan couldn't shoot threes. If you asked him to shoot within 2 feet of the three point line, he was money, but there was just something about that distance he could never get. That's why the shorter three point line made such a dramatic difference.

 

[Shinobi]

Bat is correct about the 3-point shooting (which Jordan was never great at, though he hit a ton of them when needed in the clutch), but I also have to be a myth-buster, this time dispelling DJ_Tet's misconceptions:


Jordan's jumper from 19 feet and in was MONEY from the moment he stepped into the league. Orders of magnitude better than any of the stars today with the exception of Ray Allen and Dirk. I suggest that people who don't believe me go watch some games from '85-'88. His midrange jumper made the rest of his offensive game, and he scored a ton more than people think off midrange J's (off pick&rolls, off curls, off baseline screens etc.). Hell, he even had the turnaround J in the post from about '87 onward.


Anyone who parrots the "conventional wisdom" about the weakness of his jumper pre-1990 is kidding themselves, and it's obvious that they've never watched the actual games, since I have about 90 games on tape/DVD pre-1989, and in every one his jumper was incredibly consistent. What the media got hung up on (which subsequently became lore) is that, post-'92, his GAME changed to include much more jump-shooting (mostly from the post) than previously, though it was only after the first retirement that his game became, say, 75% jumpers and 25% drives (80-20 by '98), whereas pre-retirement it was around 60-40. He also extended his effective range to about 22 feet by '96. But I have the Sports Illustrated "Man of the Year" issue in my drawer from 1990, when MJ won the award, and SI called him (in 1990, mind you) "the most consistent jump-shooter in the league", saying that though Bird still had the advantage from deep, "from 20 feet and in, Jordan is automatic." 1990. Not "post-'92."


I'm telling you guys-- don't be deceived. Don't just parrot what the media has said, because I'll be glad to lend you the games so you can see for yourself. It's annoying that they continually repeat this theme when there's not a shred of truth to it, as if pre-'92 he bricked every jumper he took. News flash: a player doesn't shoot 52.5% over the course of their first seven seasons by bricking jumpers, I don't care how many drives/dunks he had.

...told ya. :lol

You assholes mentioning Robert Swift of Seattle, are you forgetting that some HS prospects need to be planted and groomed before they begin to bloom and flourish? I think so. When I look at my growing garden, I'm reminded of Swift: a flower in growth who'll produce beautiful results very soon.

Recognize. W3RD.

:lol You're the man dawg...

I'd love know how many three pointers MJ dropped in the clutch. I bet the precentage number went up quite a bit.

 

[Loki]

Loki, I think he was referring to his turn around/fade away jump shot on the post, which he really did develop later in his career, mostly because he didn't need it earlier. He was always deadly from mid range, though, no questions asked. But his post game improved tremendously after his first retirement, and I think that is what DJ_Tet is referring to.

It always struck me as odd that Jordan couldn't shoot threes. If you asked him to shoot within 2 feet of the three point line, he was money, but there was just something about that distance he could never get. That's why the shorter three point line made such a dramatic difference.

Yeah, the fadeaway in the post, particularly accompanied by the "Dream Shake" (which Jordan invented, not Hakeem-- apologies to Miguel ), was developed from '91 onward. You really saw him use it a lot in the '92 and '93 Finals, but it became the staple of his game post-retirement, obviously.


As far as three-pointers go, I heard that it had something to do with the size of his hands, though I'm not sure if I buy that. Apparently, it's much easier to shoot threes when your hands are smaller because you get a better "feel" of the ball and can direct it more accurately (which strikes me as somewhat counterintuitive, but whatever). I forget where I read this, but it was fairly recently. It is weird, though, because he had excellent shooting mechanics and, as you said, was great from 21 and in.



He's hit some ridiculous threes when it was needed, however, and that's really all that matters.

I'd love know how many three pointers MJ dropped in the clutch. I bet the precentage number went up quite a bit.

Quite a lot. I have the tapes. Seriously though, off the top of my head I can think of about 15+ game-winning/tying 3's, including some ridiculous ones from like 26 feet out, double-pumping etc.

 

[levious]

As far as three-pointers go, I heard that it had something to do with the size of his hands, though I'm not sure if I buy that. Apparently, it's much easier to shoot threes when your hands are smaller because you get a better "feel" of the ball and can direct it more accurately (which strikes me as somewhat counterintuitive, but whatever). I forget where I read this, but it was fairly recently. It is weird, though, because he had excellent shooting mechanics and, as you said, was great from 21 and in.

Yeah, I buy that, since it's always been a factor in free throw shooters.

 

[pilonv1]

And one of those is a white stiff center, which is basically a guaranteed bust no matter where they are from (hello Andrew Bogut!).

I can't believe anyone thought Swift would do something this year, he's hopeless. As for Bogut, if you saw him matched up versus Duncan at the Olympics last year you'd be changing your tune.

 

[Loki]

Yeah, I buy that, since it's always been a factor in free throw shooters.

I know about how it affects free throws (Shaq is often used as an example), but why would Jordan then be great from the line and from 21 feet and in, yet struggle at distance? Of course, there is a smaller margin for error on a shot that's further out, so perhaps that's the answer.


The only other guys who have as big a pair of hands as Jordan are guys like Shaq, Wilt, Dr. J, and Lebron (from what I've heard, Lebron has huge paws). Dr. J was a set shooter from 3 like Magic Johnson, so it wouldn't have affected him as much in terms of the mechanics; Lebron is still developing, so the jury's out on how his hand size affects his shot from three. Shaq obviously has NO touch anywhere when using normal shooting form, while Wilt had a decent fallaway J yet struggled with FT's. Weird.