PG Height

[jazzfan1971]

I've always considered 6'1" to be prototypical PG size. And I hear a lot of hand wringing about Burke being undersized. So, I tried to get a feel for what sizes PGs in the league really were. Quite a few of the players in here didn't have actual data to use so I estimated. Those estimates could be wildly off. If anyone has better numbers they'd like me to use I'll be happy to edit it.

http://www.numsum.com/spreadsheet/show_raw/131533

Basically, it shows Burke to be about 1.25 inches short, a tad over average wingspan, and about average standing reach.

Of all the measurements for a PG I believe wingspan is the most important.

[BrooklynBulls]

I think the Burke being undersized talk is vastly overstated. He's appropriately sized. I just don't think he's supremely talented, that's all. Closer to Mo Williams than Damien Lillard. We'll see, though. I've been wrong before and I'll be wrong again.

[ibraheim718]

6'2" is the gold standard.. 6'4" is terrific if you can find it.

[NOODLESTYLE]

If you're undersized, you probably need other things to make up for it. Ty Lawson has speed and can shoot but only a 6' 0.75" wingspan. To a lesser extent, Jose Barea has that too. Those height measurements are also sometimes misleading because of the shoes.

Kyrie Irving is listed at 6'3", but only 6' 1.75" w/shoes and a 6'4" wingspan, but he makes up for it in other areas.

A lot of people use Draftexpress, which lists Burke at 6' 1.25" with shoes (right there with your prototypical height) and a 6' 5.5" wingspan.

http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-pre-dra ... All&sort=1

[bbalnation]

I always thought 6'3 was the standard, solid size PG. 6'4+ and you're in combo-guard territory. You're not considered too short until you reach under that 6'0 height, at least that's what I've been accustomed to .

[Inevitable]

Doesn't matter nowadays, so many two-pg lineups and small-ball.

[Basileus777]

Doesn't matter nowadays, so many two-pg lineups and small-ball.

That makes height and reach more valuable, a bigger point can more easily slide to the 2 and play alongside another smaller player.

[chitownsalesmen]

it really isn't that important.

[ibraheim718]

I always thought 6'3 was the standard, solid size PG. 6'4+ and you're in combo-guard territory. You're not considered too short until you reach under that 6'0 height, at least that's what I've been accustomed to .

Jason Kidd is 6'4".... What determines if you're a combo guard has everything to do with how you play not how tall you are.

[bbalnation]

I always thought 6'3 was the standard, solid size PG. 6'4+ and you're in combo-guard territory. You're not considered too short until you reach under that 6'0 height, at least that's what I've been accustomed to .

Jason Kidd is 6'4".... What determines if you're a combo guard has everything to do with how you play not how tall you are.

True, but Jason Kidd, to me, is the exception, and it's why he's known as a bigger guard, even if the difference is just an inch. I'm not trying to say that if you're 6'4 you're going to be a combo-guard, all I'm saying is, from what I've seen, that's the pattern, hah. Quite a few exceptions to that rule, but that's the generalization I've been around.

[Antrim]

Ricky Rubio is 6'5", and he's the most "pure" point guard in the league.

Burke will be fine.

[Flopper]

Burke actually has excellent reach and wingspan relative to his height, so I don't think it's much of an issue at all. He'll probably have a few problems on the defensive end against the bigger, more physical PGs like Williams, Rose, and Westbrook, but he's definitely not alone in that regard.

[LobCityClips]

Like Noodle said as long as you can somehow make up the size difference it's fine. Guys like Barea, Lawson, Boykins got around it with extreme speed. Currently Bledsoe gets by with freak athleticism and wingspan. Things like this allow you to "play bigger" than what you are.

[JayMKE]

I wouldn't consider Burke undersized at all.

[miltk]

I've always considered 6'1" to be prototypical PG size. And I hear a lot of hand wringing about Burke being undersized. So, I tried to get a feel for what sizes PGs in the league really were. Quite a few of the players in here didn't have actual data to use so I estimated. Those estimates could be wildly off. If anyone has better numbers they'd like me to use I'll be happy to edit it.

http://www.numsum.com/spreadsheet/show_raw/131533

Basically, it shows Burke to be about 1.25 inches short, a tad over average wingspan, and about average standing reach.

Of all the measurements for a PG I believe wingspan is the most important.

6'1" was prototypical FOR THE 60'S.
we know he's not AI, nor cp3.

[Optms]

I have a fascination with tall point guards. Always have. Even more so if they're athletic and have the tools to defend SG's.

[ComboGuardCity]

Burke is below average in terms of speed as well. You won't find a 6' successful pg who isn't crazy fast very often. That's why I think he's a backup.

[jazzfan1971]

Hmmm.

Not saying you are wrong on the speed thing, I just want to get an idea where that is coming from. I didn't use the combine numbers for speed and agility, maybe I should have but I tend to not put much stock in them, but, Burks had a 3.16 score in the 3/4 court sprint. That's only .04 slower than Ty Lawson who is one of the fastest guards in the league.

So, you say he's below average in speed. Can you quantify that a bit somehow?

[Frank Mulely]

I think guys above 6-2 or 6-3 or so have trouble keeping up with the speedier guards. When you are 6-4 or 6-5 you are going to be slower.

[LakerLegend]

Eh, the best PG in the league isn't even 6 feet.