skones wrote:CavaliersFTW wrote:skones wrote:What you're doing is calling it inaccurate information or trying to dispel the notion that he's that tall when all players in the NBA are listed at their height in shoes (ie the inch and a quarter discrepancy). You're splitting hairs for the sake of splitting hairs to list height in socks. That's the underlying point here. John Hammond, GM John Hammond went on record saying that he came in a 6'9 190 and was nearly 6'11 and 217 lbs as of last summer. I'd say that's more legitimate info than anything you have to go by.
http://www.brewhoop.com/2014/6/24/58388 ... op-growing
I already addressed this you overlooked it.
He measured 6-10 and 1/4 as a rookie in shoes, 6-9 without shoes.
He measured 6-10 and 3/4 last year in shoes, 6-9 and 1/2 without shoes.
He only grew a half inch. He's 6-9 and 1/2 barefoot. This is not splitting hairs it's being factually correct and removing the variables of inconsistent and inaccurate list heights and shoes data which is important when trying to have a sensible discussion and thread about height and athleticism. I already pointed out there was an article/writer which erroneously concluded Giannis grew 2" because whomever sourced that data failed to understand the difference in shoes/w/o shoes measurements from Giannis rookie season (6-9) to his with shoes data the following year (6-10 and 3/4) and they thus erroneously concluded Giannis grew 2" but in fact he grew 1/2". Read through the information I posted a few links prior so we don't have to revisit points like this.
Giannis is shorter than Garnett. Garnett measured 6-11 without shoes but lists 6-11. Giannis "only" measures 6-9 and 1/2 without shoes but lists 6-11. See why this is important to point out? They both list the same but they both are an inch and a half different in height. Listed height is not an "in shoes" height, listed height is just a marketing number, whatever the player chooses it to be (generally yes, they all inflate, sometimes it is similar to their in shoes height but some times it's nowhere close). Kevin Love for example, is not 6-10 in shoes. At 6-7 and 3/4 without, even in shoes he's only 6-9. What's with the extra gifted inch? Jerry West in the 1960's measured 6-4 and change without shoes, but they listed him 6-3. What's with billing him that short? Ralph Sampson listed 7-4, but he was closer to 7-1 and was much shorter than the 7-3 and 3/4 Mark Eaton who also listed 7-4. There is no standard formula for list heights. As such any time a thread is created where "height" becomes a variable for comparison I will always come in and try to point out the facts I've learned minus outside variables such as "in shoes" and "listed" information. A person's height is the height they are without shoes, period. Sometimes that information doesn't exist for certain NBA players, but when it does exist such as in the case for Giannis and Garnett you best believe I'm going to put it on the table so that the discussion that follows can be accurate. Sorry if it offends anyone but there's no sensible discussion to be had here if fans of the game cannot accept measurement data when it is put in front of them. It's one of the things I, as a fan, go through great lengths to find the factual data on, just for these types of discussions and comparisons. Measurement data accuracy when making player size comparisons is critically important in my opinion - and contrary to what may be popular belief, list info is not an accurate stat for such comparisons.
What you're doing is using "speculative information" when it goes against your argument and speaking in absolutes when it goes for it. There is nothing to suggest that Garnett was definitively 6'11 in socks pre draft, because at the time he was drafted, there were no predraft measurements, only those listed by their agents, who, by and by, would have every reason to say that he's 6'11 in order to give his client more value while still allowing him to avoid the center position in that era. So, in calling something like that, "factual data" isn't necessarily true.
With that being said, Garnett's height is difficult to speak about in absolutes because he hails from a different era having been drafted so long ago. Now, when players come into the league, they are nearly ALWAYS listed at their height in shoes (generally rounded up). That is their NBA height for all intensive purposes. Speaking about players in todays league at their "in socks real world height" is pretty worthless as it completely removes context and a more reliable comparitive method across the league.
I'm not using "speculative information" pleased don't trivialize the data. I provided a sound body of evidence. Draftexpress data is not speculative. While it's true the older data can contain inaccuracies due to being drawn from newspaper draft data Kevin Garnett has admitted in prior interviews to being around 6-11, and he weighs substantially more than Giannis while still visibly appearing nearly as thin... that significantly greater mass has got to come from somewhere, most logical would be his cite-able extra height. 217lbs as a rail thin rookie that would disappear if you looked at him sideways to 253lbs later in his career. Compare that to Giannis, 190 pounds to 217 pounds after filling out and growing a half inch. Their difference in mass is what one should expect if they differed in height.
Draftexpress states Giannis was 6-9 as a rookie, and other data on him in the draft indicates that was his without shoes height as draft data can be found indicating he was 6-10 and 1/4 in shoes as a rookie, he grew a year later to - and i quote "6-9 and 1/2 without shoes", or 6-10 and 3/4 with shoes thus people claimed he's "6-11" (and mistakenly presumed he grew to 6-11 from 6-9, but they did not take into consideration the shoes variable).
Draftexpress and interviews by Garnett indicate he was a legitimate 6-11. As in, 6-11 without shoes.
Not much to speculative about this and I'm not sure what exactly you're contesting here. This is pretty cut and dry. If you've got something you specifically want to contest please do so, and I'll provide the body of evidence. I've researched and collected player measurement data not just for this era but for the entire history of the game, I can tell you armspans, hand width and hand lengths, reach numbers, and a even 100 yard dash times for many players both well-known and obscure throughout the history of the game, and cite exactly where I got all that information from. It's not that trivial in my opinion. When a number is provided that says "Player A measured ____ without shoes" it's generally accurate, as not many people go out of their way to phrase or indicate a players measurement data with such specific keywords unless they've actually acquired that data and given themselves a reason to use such specific keywords. Is it possible some data can be bad, misleading or a typo or something along those lines? Sure I've run into it a few times actually, where data from one source might not match another for example. But the majority situations it can be determined through deduction which source is accurate or more plausible. In this situation through sources such as draftexpress it can be determined with confidence that Giannis is not as tall as Garnett. There's too much evidence that points to one as being 6-9 and 1/2, and the other being a legitimate 6-11. And there's actually no evidence that has been presented to suggest otherwise.
