RealGM

Largest shoe sizes:

22: Shaquille O'Neal, Tacko Fall
20: Karl-Anthony Towns, Lopez twins
19: Love, Drummond
18: Yao, Gobert, Dwight Howard, DeAndre Jordan
17: Durant, Anthony Davis, Joel Embiid, Larry Bird .. Donovan Mitchell!

One of my least favorite good players to watch-so sloppy and whines a ton

shrink wrote:Largest shoe sizes:

22: Shaquille O'Neal, Tacko Fall
20: Karl-Anthony Towns, Lopez twins
19: Love, Drummond
18: Yao, Gobert, Dwight Howard, DeAndre Jordan
17: Durant, Anthony Davis, Joel Embiid, Larry Bird .. Donovan Mitchell!

That Mitchell inclusion had me flabbergasted.

He's always reminded me of a baby giraffe learning how to walk. He's just very clumsy, his feet get tangled, and he has no coordination.

Dan33185 wrote:He's always reminded me of a baby giraffe learning how to walk. He's just very clumsy, his feet get tangled, and he has no coordination.

But can't he control his damn hands?

10DayContract wrote:

Dan33185 wrote:He's always reminded me of a baby giraffe learning how to walk. He's just very clumsy, his feet get tangled, and he has no coordination.

But can't he control his damn hands?

Doesn't seem like it...he seems to lose focus on playing basketball and starts playing for fouls. He's not alone in that though.

His brain is too wet, too splashy. Tough on the equilibrium.

Pattycakes wrote:

Ken Bannister wrote:

ogmagicfan wrote:I'll assume its a combination of weak handle and weak core strength/balance

Rofl

Demarcus Cousins face be like "are you serious? Child please"

Yeesh man up!

ChuckChilly wrote:One thing I noticed is that his sneakers are massive even for his size. Its like he's literally playing in clown shoes. Maybe thats it.

youngthegiant wrote:probably because of his humongous feet

Yeah they're size 20 which is just a little ridiculous. Only Gobert and the Lopez brothers currently have feet that size. For comparison, Shaq and Tacko Fall have size 22. Embiid is 17, Durant's hockey sticks are 18.


Kat has a ridiculous first step. It's one of his super powers. He's never had good deceleration so that first step leads to crashing into help if he doesn't have the lane.

He came into the league pretty strong, but injuries have really sapped away at that. You can look at his post up possessions in his first 3-4 seasons and it's obvious he didn't stay on that physical trajectory.

he's 7'

do you notice this when he's running? it could be that

I've never seen that KAT / DMC picture until today. So today has been a great day. Thank you Ken Bannister!

Talent wise. He might be the most awkward looking player of all time. If he was smoother he would get a normal whistle as well

shrink wrote:Largest shoe sizes:

22: Shaquille O'Neal, Tacko Fall
20: Karl-Anthony Towns, Lopez twins
19: Love, Drummond
18: Yao, Gobert, Dwight Howard, DeAndre Jordan
17: Durant, Anthony Davis, Joel Embiid, Larry Bird .. Donovan Mitchell!

I'm 6'2 and I have size 15 feet. It's a curse.

dhsilv2 wrote:

chudak wrote:

MMyhre wrote:Lol

biggest difference is indeed a stretch and untrue, but it is true that players that when you are in good physical shape in terms of core strength and balance you make less mistakes

it is also true that if you lose your breath easily you make more mistakes as brain and awareness need oxygen

so physical shape and making good decisions in reactionary sports do go together

I said one of, not the biggest.

It`s still silly to make a link between core strength and perceived basketball intelligence, lol. Core strength is indeed key to transfer force and help stabilize/balance indeed, but its too much to say its "mostly" that, more ankle mobility and stronger knees will allow you to get deeper, thus enabling a lower centre of gravity, stronger leg and hip musculature will allow you to resist all kinds of momentum/force in different directions better, and that`s just a much bigger amount of muscles, so I would rather have piss strong legs, hips and supporting musculature, than some guy who can do a **** ton of situps, if I had one choice for example. Since its lower on the body, and adds much more mass/is more mass, its also going to contribute way more with establishing a lower centre of gravity if we build strength and size here.

Then you have differences in limb lengths, black people are in general longer in the limbs, shorter torsos, so a higher centre of gravity due to having a longer lower body - longer tibia and femur, than white and asian people on average. He may be longer than even the black average in these areas + like you said, has a weak core, but probably also issues elsewhere, it could be foot and ankle, calf problems blabla there is just so much that can screw up balance so it`s a bit rushed to just use the way overused "fix" in core strength as the obvious main culprit, while it could just be one of many, many things. +++

MMyhre wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

chudak wrote:
biggest difference is indeed a stretch and untrue, but it is true that players that when you are in good physical shape in terms of core strength and balance you make less mistakes

it is also true that if you lose your breath easily you make more mistakes as brain and awareness need oxygen

so physical shape and making good decisions in reactionary sports do go together

I said one of, not the biggest.

It`s still silly to make a link between core strength and perceived basketball intelligence, lol. Core strength is indeed key to transfer force and help stabilize/balance indeed, but its too much to say its "mostly" that, more ankle mobility and stronger knees will allow you to get deeper, thus enabling a lower centre of gravity, stronger leg and hip musculature will allow you to resist all kinds of momentum/force in different directions better, and that`s just a much bigger amount of muscles, so I would rather have piss strong legs, hips and supporting musculature, than some guy who can do a **** ton of situps, if I had one choice for example. Since its lower on the body, and adds much more mass/is more mass, its also going to contribute way more with establishing a lower centre of gravity if we build strength and size here.

Then you have differences in limb lengths, black people are in general longer in the limbs, shorter torsos, so a higher centre of gravity due to having a longer lower body - longer tibia and femur, than white and asian people on average. He may be longer than even the black average in these areas + like you said, has a weak core, but probably also issues elsewhere, it could be foot and ankle, calf problems blabla there is just so much that can screw up balance so it`s a bit rushed to just use the way overused "fix" in core strength as the obvious main culprit, while it could just be one of many, many things. +++

Center of gravity is pretty heavily driven by limb length as you covered. But again, I said one of the most. Not the most, mostly, the most, or any other combination.

Also core isn't just your abs, it's also your posterior chain.

And i"d add squats and deadlifts are likely your best way to build up your core anyway. not doing never ending situps.

dhsilv2 wrote:

MMyhre wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:
I said one of, not the biggest.

It`s still silly to make a link between core strength and perceived basketball intelligence, lol. Core strength is indeed key to transfer force and help stabilize/balance indeed, but its too much to say its "mostly" that, more ankle mobility and stronger knees will allow you to get deeper, thus enabling a lower centre of gravity, stronger leg and hip musculature will allow you to resist all kinds of momentum/force in different directions better, and that`s just a much bigger amount of muscles, so I would rather have piss strong legs, hips and supporting musculature, than some guy who can do a **** ton of situps, if I had one choice for example. Since its lower on the body, and adds much more mass/is more mass, its also going to contribute way more with establishing a lower centre of gravity if we build strength and size here.

Then you have differences in limb lengths, black people are in general longer in the limbs, shorter torsos, so a higher centre of gravity due to having a longer lower body - longer tibia and femur, than white and asian people on average. He may be longer than even the black average in these areas + like you said, has a weak core, but probably also issues elsewhere, it could be foot and ankle, calf problems blabla there is just so much that can screw up balance so it`s a bit rushed to just use the way overused "fix" in core strength as the obvious main culprit, while it could just be one of many, many things. +++

Center of gravity is pretty heavily driven by limb length as you covered. But again, I said one of the most. Not the most, mostly, the most, or any other combination.

Also core isn't just your abs, it's also your posterior chain.

And i"d add squats and deadlifts are likely your best way to build up your core anyway. not doing never ending situps.

The primary exercises people associate with core work are planks, bosu ball junk and situps ++ though. I disagree, as if you would not expect to grow strong and big biceps by isometrically contracting/having it stabilize as a supporting muscle in an exercise, so why would we do the same for our abs/front core or lumbar region ++. Working it through a deep range of motion with focus on more eccentric length thus more damage/adaptations to a bigger area with control will always yield superior results compared to just using it as a stabilizer and supporting musculature.

Its just a limited view/agenda put out there by autopilot lazy youtube or celebrity PT's. Why would the core region respond differently to strength and growth stimulus than other muscles? More movement of a muscle and surrounding tissues equals more growth and more strength gained over a larger area than just contracting isometrically without moving, and it doesnt even do that in many cases for the front core/abs as its merely there to stabilize because we cant have our trunk flexing randomly in a squat for example.

I can say I did deadlifts, and then I went cross county skiing with a classic stylr which requires a lot of strength in lumbar flexion, and I had spasms and tons of issues by the end of it. And I was someone who used my lumbar back more than others in a dlift, but its just not comparable to loading up a Jefferson Curl and getting **** cranked strong and mobile in the lower back. And also getting isolated work and tension on ONLY that area, especially in the deeper stretch which in my experience is a key factor for athleticism/strength and injury resistance ++.

MMyhre wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

MMyhre wrote:It`s still silly to make a link between core strength and perceived basketball intelligence, lol. Core strength is indeed key to transfer force and help stabilize/balance indeed, but its too much to say its "mostly" that, more ankle mobility and stronger knees will allow you to get deeper, thus enabling a lower centre of gravity, stronger leg and hip musculature will allow you to resist all kinds of momentum/force in different directions better, and that`s just a much bigger amount of muscles, so I would rather have piss strong legs, hips and supporting musculature, than some guy who can do a **** ton of situps, if I had one choice for example. Since its lower on the body, and adds much more mass/is more mass, its also going to contribute way more with establishing a lower centre of gravity if we build strength and size here.

Then you have differences in limb lengths, black people are in general longer in the limbs, shorter torsos, so a higher centre of gravity due to having a longer lower body - longer tibia and femur, than white and asian people on average. He may be longer than even the black average in these areas + like you said, has a weak core, but probably also issues elsewhere, it could be foot and ankle, calf problems blabla there is just so much that can screw up balance so it`s a bit rushed to just use the way overused "fix" in core strength as the obvious main culprit, while it could just be one of many, many things. +++

Center of gravity is pretty heavily driven by limb length as you covered. But again, I said one of the most. Not the most, mostly, the most, or any other combination.

Also core isn't just your abs, it's also your posterior chain.

And i"d add squats and deadlifts are likely your best way to build up your core anyway. not doing never ending situps.

The primary exercises people associate with core work are planks, bosu ball junk and situps ++ though. I disagree, as if you would not expect to grow strong and big biceps by isometrically contracting/having it stabilize as a supporting muscle in an exercise, so why would we do the same for our abs/front core or lumbar region ++. Working it through a deep range of motion with focus on more eccentric length thus more damage/adaptations to a bigger area with control will always yield superior results compared to just using it as a stabilizer and supporting musculature.

Its just a limited view/agenda put out there by autopilot lazy youtube or celebrity PT's. Why would the core region respond differently to strength and growth stimulus than other muscles? More movement of a muscle and surrounding tissues equals more growth and more strength gained over a larger area than just contracting isometrically without moving, and it doesnt even do that in many cases for the front core/abs as its merely there to stabilize because we cant have our trunk flexing randomly in a squat for example.

I can say I did deadlifts, and then I went cross county skiing with a classic stylr which requires a lot of strength in lumbar flexion, and I had spasms and tons of issues by the end of it. And I was someone who used my lumbar back more than others in a dlift, but its just not comparable to loading up a Jefferson Curl and getting **** cranked strong and mobile in the lower back. And also getting isolated work and tension on ONLY that area, especially in the deeper stretch which in my experience is a key factor for athleticism/strength and injury resistance ++.

I wouldn't recommend biceps work for anyone not body building. Your core gets trained just fine with squats, deadlifts, reverse hypers, hypers, glut ham raises, pull throughs, and if you must some isolation with WEIGHTED sit ups. All that yoga core stuff isn't going to do much for an athlete.

I've always thought he thinks and plays like he's around 6 feet.

dhsilv2 wrote:

MMyhre wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:
Center of gravity is pretty heavily driven by limb length as you covered. But again, I said one of the most. Not the most, mostly, the most, or any other combination.

Also core isn't just your abs, it's also your posterior chain.

And i"d add squats and deadlifts are likely your best way to build up your core anyway. not doing never ending situps.

The primary exercises people associate with core work are planks, bosu ball junk and situps ++ though. I disagree, as if you would not expect to grow strong and big biceps by isometrically contracting/having it stabilize as a supporting muscle in an exercise, so why would we do the same for our abs/front core or lumbar region ++. Working it through a deep range of motion with focus on more eccentric length thus more damage/adaptations to a bigger area with control will always yield superior results compared to just using it as a stabilizer and supporting musculature.

Its just a limited view/agenda put out there by autopilot lazy youtube or celebrity PT's. Why would the core region respond differently to strength and growth stimulus than other muscles? More movement of a muscle and surrounding tissues equals more growth and more strength gained over a larger area than just contracting isometrically without moving, and it doesnt even do that in many cases for the front core/abs as its merely there to stabilize because we cant have our trunk flexing randomly in a squat for example.

I can say I did deadlifts, and then I went cross county skiing with a classic stylr which requires a lot of strength in lumbar flexion, and I had spasms and tons of issues by the end of it. And I was someone who used my lumbar back more than others in a dlift, but its just not comparable to loading up a Jefferson Curl and getting **** cranked strong and mobile in the lower back. And also getting isolated work and tension on ONLY that area, especially in the deeper stretch which in my experience is a key factor for athleticism/strength and injury resistance ++.

I wouldn't recommend biceps work for anyone not body building. Your core gets trained just fine with squats, deadlifts, reverse hypers, hypers, glut ham raises, pull throughs, and if you must some isolation with WEIGHTED sit ups. All that yoga core stuff isn't going to do much for an athlete.

Well, now you added some other better targetting exercises so it would be better, yes. Not Yoga I am talking about. https://www.instagram.com/rangeofstrength?igsh=aWlpeWRpYnpxcmlm

You can see the idea in this guy.

MMyhre wrote:

dhsilv2 wrote:

MMyhre wrote:The primary exercises people associate with core work are planks, bosu ball junk and situps ++ though. I disagree, as if you would not expect to grow strong and big biceps by isometrically contracting/having it stabilize as a supporting muscle in an exercise, so why would we do the same for our abs/front core or lumbar region ++. Working it through a deep range of motion with focus on more eccentric length thus more damage/adaptations to a bigger area with control will always yield superior results compared to just using it as a stabilizer and supporting musculature.

Its just a limited view/agenda put out there by autopilot lazy youtube or celebrity PT's. Why would the core region respond differently to strength and growth stimulus than other muscles? More movement of a muscle and surrounding tissues equals more growth and more strength gained over a larger area than just contracting isometrically without moving, and it doesnt even do that in many cases for the front core/abs as its merely there to stabilize because we cant have our trunk flexing randomly in a squat for example.

I can say I did deadlifts, and then I went cross county skiing with a classic stylr which requires a lot of strength in lumbar flexion, and I had spasms and tons of issues by the end of it. And I was someone who used my lumbar back more than others in a dlift, but its just not comparable to loading up a Jefferson Curl and getting **** cranked strong and mobile in the lower back. And also getting isolated work and tension on ONLY that area, especially in the deeper stretch which in my experience is a key factor for athleticism/strength and injury resistance ++.

I wouldn't recommend biceps work for anyone not body building. Your core gets trained just fine with squats, deadlifts, reverse hypers, hypers, glut ham raises, pull throughs, and if you must some isolation with WEIGHTED sit ups. All that yoga core stuff isn't going to do much for an athlete.

Well, now you added some other better targetting exercises so it would be better, yes. Not Yoga I am talking about. https://www.instagram.com/rangeofstrength?igsh=aWlpeWRpYnpxcmlm

You can see the idea in this guy.

I said the best way is squats and deadlifts. I didn't say that was all you had to do. I swear...it's like i gotta write a book to avoid confusion sometimes. As for that guy...I'm not an elite athlete coach (not that he appears to be). But I don't think any of that is how you get KAT to having a strong enough core/base. Simple power lifting routines are where KAT needs work. Once you've got that baseline...the maintenance and increases in flexibility could open up something like that. KAT needs 2 years doing some basic starting strength/west side type routine modified possibly for his frame and to minimize injury risks. Again...I'm no expert to address training a 7'0 freak.