Benjammin wrote:Apparently standing reach has more variability in its measurements and may not be as reliable as wingspan, for example:
http://www.brewhoop.com/2008/6/22/54308 ... r-explorin
Great find, Benjamin. From the article:
Note: After posting this I received an email from a trainer who offered up a very logical explanation for the standing reach volatility in particular. They noted that inconsistent application of the standing reach test means that players can effectively "tank" their standing reaches by slouching, extending their elbows slightly, etc., which lowers their standing reach. Why do that? Because vertical leaps are typically calculated based on the difference between max (jumping) reach and standing reach.
Thus, a player can to some extent manipulate their measurements--if they want a more impressive vertical then they can tank their standing reach, though obviously it's a tradeoff. Guards may find it particularly beneficial to inflate their verticals at the expense of standing reach, which is probably not scrutinized nearly as closely by teams.
This might explain Beal to some extent. I'm still surprised to see his lackluster standing reach when he has decent height, a good wingspan, and no neck. Maybe we ought to add an inch or two to his standing reach and take an inch or two off of his vertical.