Bradley Beal

[doclinkin]

Why do doctors think that? Aren't most people done growing by 20?

Dunno, this is the only place I read that, but if his growth plates evince signs of still being active then he could add height. Recall JaVale grew an inch his first year here, and he was older than that. I grew 5 inches between age 17 and 22. Some are late growers.

[montestewart]

Why do doctors think that? Aren't most people done growing by 20?

Dunno, this is the only place I read that, but if his growth plates evince signs of still being active then he could add height. Recall JaVale grew an inch his first year here, and he was older than that. I grew 5 inches between age 17 and 22. Some are late growers.

David Robinson had the exact same growth spurt during an identical age span. Coincidence?

So Beal could be 6'8"?

[hands11]

*On June 26, the St. Louis native turns 20. So, what we will a two-decade old Bradley Beal look like next season? "I don't know. Hopefully more facial hair."

*Since different websites list different heights, perhaps Beal could provide a definitive answer on just how tall he is. "That's a good question, that's a great question actually. I don't even know how tall I am. I'm hoping 6'4" - I am 6'4", 6'5" on a good day."

His last answer is both humorous and a reminder that the Wizards have a player on their roster that is of an age where he is still growing. If doctors are accurate, Beal expects to tack on another 2-3 inches.

Link.

Like, zoinks Scoob! Beal +2-3 inches would be a really rough match-up for most. He already plays bigger than he stands, tough to move off his spot on defense. And at 6'7" or 6' 8" he would be our SGSF swingman of the future. Get a combo guard who can shoot from long and we'd be seriously versatile.

http://www.monumentalnetwork.com/videos ... ec17ed0000

The 15 minute interview.

I love that this young man is on our team.

[jivelikenice]

Any confirmation on him playing SL? At first I thought it was pointless but it could be a good way to help him develop and work on creating his own shot and maybe even some pg skills. Let Satoransky start and have Beal play a few minutes of pg for the work....

[dangermouse]

a 6'6"/6'7" Bradley Beal?

hell to the yes.

he doesnt even really need the extra height, he is more athletic than he looks as we all saw this year with all the blocks, rebounds and big dunks he had. he's good now. but can you imagine another few inches of reach?????

[nate33]

John Wall was measured at 6'-2.75" (no shoes) before he was drafted. Flip Saunders said that he grew at least an inch over his first two seasons and now measures 6'-5" (presumably 6'-4" without shoes). Let's assume Flip has overstated it a bit and Wall is just 6'-3.5" no shoes.

Looking at the photos, Beal is at least a half-inch taller than Wall and maybe a full inch. So figure 6'-4.5" with no shoes. He was measured at 6'-3.25" in camp just one year ago, so he has already grown at least an inch. That 6'-4.5" estimate jibes with his statement that he's "6-4, maybe 6-5 on a good day". The importance here is that he's talking about a bare foot measurement.

Let's assume he grows another inch. (I'm not buying another 2-3 inches, that's huge for such a late growth spurt.) That'll make him 6'-5.5" no shoes and he'll be listed at 6-7. He also has no neck so he should play taller. His wingspan was measured pre-draft at 6-8 and if he ends up growing a full 2.5 inches since then, his wingspan will probably grow at least 1.5 inches. So we're talking about a guy who will be listed at 6-7 with a 6-10 wingspan and no neck. That's big enough to play a fair amount of SF.

[Ruzious]

You really can't tell anything from most pictures - especially when you can't see where their feet are. I think Beal was probably kidding when he said he might grow a couple more inches. He and Wall are most likely both a hair under 6'5 and will stay that way - which is fine.

[nate33]

You really can't tell anything from most pictures - especially when you can't see where their feet are. I think Beal was probably kidding when he said he might grow a couple more inches. He and Wall are most likely both a hair under 6'5 and will stay that way - which is fine.

That first picture is pretty telling. In photo-shoots like that, it's safe to assume that they're standing side-by-side. I agree that those in-game photos can often be misleading based on the camera angle. I tried to find a good one, but you can never be sure.

[willbcocks]

Assumption 1 John Wall was measured at 6'-2.75" (no shoes) before he was drafted. Flip Saunders said that he grew at least an inch over his first two seasons and now measures 6'-5" (presumably 6'-4" without shoes). Let's assume Flip has overstated it a bit and Wall is just 6'-3.5" no shoes.

Assumption 2 Looking at the photos, Beal is at least a half-inch taller than Wall and maybe a full inch. So figure 6'-4.5" with no shoes.

Assumption 3 He was measured at 6'-3.25" in camp just one year ago, so he has already grown at least an inch.

Assumprion 4 Let's assume he grows another inch. (I'm not buying another 2-3 inches, that's huge for such a late growth spurt.)

Assumption 5 That'll make him 6'-5.5" no shoes and he'll be listed at 6-7.

Assumption 6 He also has no neck so he should play taller.

Assumption 7 His wingspan was measured pre-draft at 6-8 and if he ends up growing a full 2.5 inches since then, his wingspan will probably grow at least 1.5 inches.

Conclusion So we're talking about a guy who will be listed at 6-7 with a 6-10 wingspan and no neck. That's big enough to play a fair amount of SF.

Nate, I've seen people make assumptions about players growing before, but this might be the most intricate, detailed one I've ever seen. It's like a growth assumption highlight reel.

What's far more likely is that Beal stays 6'5 with a decent but not great standing reach and wingspan for a shooting guard. He would always be an undersized SF. But does anyone post up effectively in today's NBA? I'm not sure it matters much against all Lebron-less teams.

[AFM]

We know Beal is at least an inch taller than DWade. Wade has one of the best post games as a guard in the league. Beal is also strong as a bull. Would be great if he could add a post up game to his repertoire like Wade

[pancakes3]

I think it'd be a stretch (haha) to put Beal in at SF, and I'm not sure why you'd want to. With Webster/Ariza/Martin on the roster, good prospects in this draft and next at SF, and the absolute abundance in free agency, there's no need to stick beal out there. It does make Beal a better SG prospect and as AFM said, encourages the development of a good post game.

Of course Tony Parker made a career year this year in the post, so height is not a huge deciding factor in post success.

[nate33]

I'm offended by your post willbcocks. Assumption implies a total lack of evidence when I detail the evidence in the post

You also make no distinction between assumption and estimation. And you also suggest that I made 7 different assumptions when in reality, it's 2 estimations and one assumption. It is not an assumption that Beal is a half-inch taller, it is an estimation based on multiple photos. It is not an assumption that 6-4.5 + 1" equals 6'-5.5. The 6-4.5" is an estimate and the 1" is an assumption, but the arithmetic is simple math.

The two assumptions are that Flip is accurate in his estimation of Wall's height, and that Beal will grow another inch. The one estimation is that Beal is roughly .75 inches taller than Wall. Maybe I'm off by a quarter inch either way, but I wouldn't characterize it as an assumption as if there is no evidence to back it up.

[nate33]

I think it'd be a stretch (haha) to put Beal in at SF, and I'm not sure why you'd want to. With Webster/Ariza/Martin on the roster, good prospects in this draft and next at SF, and the absolute abundance in free agency, there's no need to stick beal out there. It does make Beal a better SG prospect and as AFM said, encourages the development of a good post game.

Of course Tony Parker made a career year this year in the post, so height is not a huge deciding factor in post success.

I only mention the SF part because it would open the door to draft a SG if that's the BPA. We could take McLemore if we land a top 3 pick or Oladipo if we're sitting at #8. If Beal is merely 6-4.5 in shoes, it's a stretch to play him at SF for any time. But if he's somewhere between 6-6 and 6-7, it shouldn't be an issue to play him there for 15 minutes a game.

[willbcocks]

I'm offended by your post willbcocks. Assumption implies a total lack of evidence when I detail the evidence in the post

You also make no distinction between assumption and estimation. And you also suggest that I made 7 different assumptions when in reality, it's 2 estimations and one assumption. It is not an assumption that Beal is a half-inch taller, it is an estimation based on multiple photos. It is not an assumption that 6-4.5 + 1" equals 6'-5.5. The 6-4.5" is an estimate and the 1" is an assumption, but the arithmetic is simple math.

The two assumptions are that Flip is accurate in his estimation of Wall's height, and that Beal will grow another inch. The one estimation is that Beal is roughly .75 inches taller than Wall. Maybe I'm off by a quarter inch either way, but I wouldn't characterize it as an assumption as if there is no evidence to back it up.

The 6'4.5 assumption I said you made isn't adding 1, it's that shoes will add 1.5 inches. I've found this varies, and that's on the high end.

All of these add up. That's why the number of assumptions (if you want to separate "estimate" "hearsay" and "assumption" as three separate things, that's fine, but I lumped them all together because each assumes a certain measurement in this post) matters.

[nate33]

The 6'4.5 assumption I said you made isn't adding 1, it's that shoes will add 1.5 inches. I've found this varies, and that's on the high end.

I'm not sure where it is that I said this. I said that Wall is about 6-3.5 without shoes and Beal is therefore 6-4.5 without shoes. The 1-inch estimate is from the photos. I took Wall's height and added an inch.

FWIW, The average no-shoes height for the 2012 draft class was 78.15" (out of 50 players for whom DX had measurements). The average height with shoes was 79.44". Last year, the average additional height attributed to shoes was therefore 1.29 inches. I assume that that 1.25" shoe height is fairly normal. So his shoes will get him from 6-5.5 to 6-6.75, which I rounded to 6-7 because players rarely list themselves in decimal fragments.

Whatever. The point is, Beal may have already grown from "undersized" SG to an average or slightly above-average sized SG. And if he grows a little more, he'll be considered pretty tall for a SG with some ability to steal some minutes at SF.

[Nivek]

My first crack at generating similarity scores is up at the blog. First entry is about Beal and Wall. Beal's comps are interesting -- a few guys that are 5+ years older, as well as some SF types who shoot 3s. The names on the list are indicative to me of something discussed here -- namely Beal playing "bigger" than his measurements and his position.

I think folks will like the Wall comps too.

[DCsOwn]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nmblFaQwWMc

My goodness I can't wait for next season to start already.

[Dark Faze]

Awesome work Nivek! Very encouraging stuff.

[Higga]

Beal named to All-Rookie team

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wiz ... okie-team/

Future is bright as long as he and Wall can remain healthy.

[sfam]

I just saw something with Rick Barry talking about Ektio Ankle Support shoes:

http://www.ektio.com/Ektio-Ankle-Support-Technology_ep_49.html

Does Beal have a shoe contract? If not, perhaps he, along with Steph Curry, should be giving these a try. If they stop sprained ankles while not losing mobility, why wouldn't he?

Unless of course the shoes suck, but I'm just going on Barry's cred here.