How much of basketball talent is based on genetics?

ocker · Post #41 » by **ocker** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:09 pm

aroba wrote:Being a great athlete helps a lot but greatness is ALWAYS MENTAL.

....ask larry bird

Larry Bird is 6 foot 9....

GreenHat · Post #42 » by **GreenHat** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:11 pm

aroba wrote:Being a great athlete helps a lot but greatness is ALWAYS MENTAL.

....ask larry bird

Yes lets ask the 6-9 guy how little gentics play in basketball. There are hundreds of guys with better minds for the game than Bird but they are a foot shorter and less athletic so they won't even make the league.

All of these estimates putting it at 80-20 are underestimating how much 20% is.

The physical aspect makes up at least 95% but most likely closer to 99%

I'm sure I will get replies with one or two outliers like "Stromile Swift sucked" which ignore that Stromile Swift is still better than millions of people who tried to play pro ball.

Frank Mulely · Post #43 » by **Frank Mulely** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:14 pm

Maybe 50%

"Basketball talent" is based on practice and hard work.

Theres PLENTY of NBA level athletes who never are able to make it or if they make it, succeed in the NBA.

Of COURSE certain positions require you to be a certain height. So yeah if you're physically not big enough it's super tough. and yes being an elite athlete helps. A lot. But among the population who are physically qualified - basically, men 6 feet and over who are good to great athletes - you have to actually be able to play.

I knew and played with plenty of guys who physically could make it but didn't. They just didn't develop their basketball skills enough.

GreenHat · Post #44 » by **GreenHat** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:15 pm

As much as we all like to pretend "our guy" made it through hard work, determination and heart (and if he's white you can add grit) in reality they were born with a huge natural advantage.

I'm not saying they didn't work hard, of course they did. What I'm saying is if they didn't have those natural advantages all the hard work would mean nothing.

LakerFanMan · Post #45 » by **LakerFanMan** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:15 pm

I think people often equate "genetics" to "athleticism" and nothing else. Keep in mind that a lot of "skill" also has a genetic aspect to it. Yes Nash worked very hard to become a good shooter, ball handler, etc... But there are contributing genetic factors to things like hand-eye coordination, vision, etc... that helped him achieve that skill level.

All in all genetics probably has an edge, as evidence by the many players who get into the league based on size for example, but it's not everything. Positive genetic factors need to be developed, reinforced, worked on, etc... in order to get to a level where a person can be competitive in the NBA.

garrick · Post #46 » by **garrick** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:15 pm

If you're a point guard you can get away with not being a uber athlete just look at Nash and Stockton who weren't elite athletes but made up for it with their IQ.
The other positions though are much harder to excel in if you're not an elite athlete but even then there are some players who can still dominate because of their smarts like Bird and Magic.

spectacularmove · Post #47 » by **spectacularmove** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:30 pm

dice wrote:TALENT is always 100% genetics

This is correct, why the op and others are separating skills from genetics? skills and athleticism are 100% genetics. Its completly different if you are asking how much of basquetball potential is based on genetics.

Post #48 » by **tsherkin** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:32 pm

Skls are not related to genetics directly. There are elements that build on genetics but there are skills which can be developed independent of birth factors.

MikeM · Post #49 » by **MikeM** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:38 pm

Anyone mention JJ Barea yet?

Post #50 » by **INKtastic** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:48 pm

genetics eliminates over 99% of people from even having a chance. And while the average NBA player is well above the average height, genetics isn't just about height. Speed and quickness are gentic too.

Also, you can't look at Michael Jordan's son to disprove the genetic requirement. Jordan's sons only got half of their genetics from Michael. Instead perhaps look at Yao Ming

In 2005, former Newsweek writer Brook Larmer published a book entitled Operation Yao Ming, in which he said that Yao's parents were convinced to marry each other so that they would produce a dominant athlete, and that during Yao's childhood, he was given special treatment to help him become a great basketball player.

Genetics isn't the only factor, though. There are a massive number of people who have the genetic makeup to be an NBA basketball who never put in the massive amount of work to become one. There's not a player in the NBA who hasn't invested 10s of thousands of hours of work to get there. And the best ones are generally the ones who go above and beyond that.

kabstah · Post #51 » by **kabstah** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:49 pm

GreenHat wrote:
aroba wrote:Being a great athlete helps a lot but greatness is ALWAYS MENTAL.

....ask larry bird

Yes lets ask the 6-9 guy how little gentics play in basketball. There are hundreds of guys with better minds for the game than Bird but they are a foot shorter and less athletic so they won't even make the league.

All of these estimates putting it at 80-20 are underestimating how much 20% is.

The physical aspect makes up at least 95% but most likely closer to 99%

I'm sure I will get replies with one or two outliers like "Stromile Swift sucked" which ignore that Stromile Swift is still better than millions of people who tried to play pro ball.

99% physical is way too conservative, I'd say at least 99.99%. For every man with enough brawn but not enough brains to play in the NBA, there are 10s of thousands who have more than enough brains but are woefully inadequate physically. The overwhelming portion of the physical attributes needed are genetic as well, and not something you can acquire through training or practice.

Take height for example: average height of a PG is about 6'1". Average male height in the US is a shade under 5'10" with a SD of 3". Just on height alone the average PG is "better" than roughly 3 out of 4 American men. Now factor in things like strength, speed, agility, coordination, etc...

spectacularmove · Post #52 » by **spectacularmove** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 6:53 pm

tsherkin wrote:Skls are not related to genetics directly. There are elements that build on genetics but there are skills which can be developed independent of birth factors.

Such as?

kabstah · Post #53 » by **kabstah** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:00 pm

spectacularmove wrote:
tsherkin wrote:Skls are not related to genetics directly. There are elements that build on genetics but there are skills which can be developed independent of birth factors.

Such as?

Free throw shooting. Almost any healthy adult can shoot FTs at an NBA acceptable level with enough training.

Post #54 » by **tsherkin** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:01 pm

INKtastic wrote: There's not a player in the NBA who hasn't invested 10s of thousands of hours of work to get there. And the best ones are generally the ones who go above and beyond that.

Project bigs from across the globe disagree with you.

ERRDAY3 · Post #55 » by **ERRDAY3** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:02 pm

Why are people acting like you can't improve your athleticism anyone can be a great athlete if they work hard enough.

ERRDAY3 · Post #56 » by **ERRDAY3** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 7:14 pm

Johnlac1 wrote:
Swingy wrote:Well, I actually think most people underestimate their athletic potential. Now, many may have something debilitating like heart or lung disorders that can make training well enough to be a NBA player near impossible, but for others, if you have the ridiculous dedication from day one, you probably could become skilled enough and maximize your athleticism enough to make it in the NBA. I know it is possible to increase your vertical quite a bit through training regiments (though, like Tsherkin said, it's a bit overrated). Also, having a great exercise regiment and diet can put most people in-shape enough to handle some of the rigors of the NBA. Also, do not underestimate garnering basketball IQ. Effort and simply knowing what to do 99% of the time can go far. Will these people have a much more difficult time than someone who is naturally tall and can easily get into shape? Of course. Is it possible, though? I'd say so, if unlikely due to the ridiculous amount of time and dedication it would require. It'd also probably have to start at a really early age.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but some people can only go so far. My older brother and I played a lot of bb when we were kids. But he was extra fast and at 5'10 1/2 could dunk a bb. I was almost 6'0, had middling speed, and could barely touch the rim from a running start. We were both excellent outside shooters, but he could take it into the big boys and score on them. Guess who was offered two bb scholarships? (hint:not me) ...after he got out of the army. He was the starting pg on a team that won the Texas Amateur championship. Sometimes a person has to accept his limitations.

You don't think you can improve your speed

karkinos · Post #57 » by **karkinos** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:09 pm

ERRDAY3 wrote:Why are people acting like you can't improve your athleticism anyone can be a great athlete if they work hard enough.

your athleticism has certain peaks based on body type. leg to torso ratio, wide vs narrow hips, etc.

even if everyone was at their peak, not everyone would make the nba

Post #58 » by **jazzfan1971** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:35 pm

I'm going to say 99%.

99% of the population could never play in the NBA even with a lifetime of dedication to the sport.

Maybe 1% of folks have enough inherent athleticism/size to be able to develop into an NBA player. Maybe one tenth of one percent.

Record Machine · Post #59 » by **Record Machine** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 8:52 pm

ERRDAY3 wrote:Why are people acting like you can't improve your athleticism anyone can be a great athlete if they work hard enough.

OH LAWD.

SichtingLives · Post #60 » by **SichtingLives** » Thu Feb 28, 2013 9:07 pm

Basketball is one of the few sports where being tall is a pre-requisite to even getting your foot in the door (and don't give me this 6 foot and under crap, you have as much of a chance winning the powerball as playing in the NBA at that size)....

so in that regard, genetics are highly important.

As far as athleticism goes, genetics can only take you as far as hard work can in that category. Without both, you're toast.

Every sport has specific sport-related skillsets necessary to compete. What you're born with can give you a nudge in the right direction...but once you get into the shark tank where everyone has the same genetic advantages you do (and this happens way before the NBA level), you better have elite skills or you and all of your superior genetic make-up will gets it's ****** head bitten off faster than you can blink.*

* Unless you're 6'10" or above in the modern game.....then you can suck ass and still get your foot in the door :wink: