I think the height isn't going to be as a big factor, as the teams' perception of his overall quickness and athleticism. What's his vertical jump and how does he use his body? FWIW, there've been plenty of pictures of Glen next to Tyrus, and Glen is a little shorter, but I don't think he is 6'6". I think he's probably a legit 6'8". At 6'8" and 290, he's still a down low presence. And, no less athletic than da "meat hook" when he was at Florida. No doubt, he's not as athletic as barkley at 6'4.5". Karl Malone was a work out fiend, even though he wasn't as "athletic". Glen's just got to prove to folks that he can dedicate himself to the regimen necessary to get there. He's saying the right things, he's just got to prove in this time that he can continue to get the weight down and muscle up.
Interesting article on the draft from former Texas player PJ Tucker. Interesting, b/c there could be very similar issues that Big Baby deals with. PJ was Big 12 player of the year. In many ways a very effective college player, but "undersized" for his position. Glen has different tools and a different body, but also in the late first round/early 2nd round dilemma... Some interesting thoughts with 20/20 hindsight... http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/columns/story?columnist=katz_andy&id=2902697
I sat on the flew on the same plane as he did earlier this year, 6'7" is probably about right, if he's that tall. Don't get me wrong, he towers over me and my 5'8" frame, but I was expecting him to be bigger.
The Advocate on the latest Big Baby stuff... http://www.2theadvocate.com/sports/8066772.html?showAll=y&c=y It sounds like the work-outs have been progressing, and with some mixed results. Glen may have suffered an injury in Sacramento, so his workout with the Wizards wasn't what he would have liked. But, he's toured with Philly, Sac', Washington, the Bulls and there may be more. I still think the NBA draft has its funny nuances. What Glen unfortunately doesn't realize, and I think many people here don't either (those that would argue that the draft is all about "potential"), is that having a good year in college leading up to the draft DOES influence scouts. It's a combination of "what have you done lately" and it's also a chance to really be in the media. I personally agree with Glen, I don't see how he can be a worse player this year than last, but with the Tigers being in the final four, scouts were watching him and talking about him. I still can't help but feel if Glen came back and the Tigers did well, he might have helped himself. But, he's got to now convince teams he's a better player... What's a little crazy is, who would you take one on one, Big Baby or Al Horford? Al Horford is just another 6'8"-6'9" 240 power forward, who has not demonstrated any of the polished game that Glen has, but he just happened to win a NC. I'd probably take Big Baby. Keep up the hard work, Big Baby! :geauxtige :bball: :champs: LSU IS A BASKETBALL SCHOOL. BE A FAN.
I hear my team, the Utah Jazz, are seriously looking into scooping him up in the 2nd round if he is still on the board. I think that would be ideal for him with Sloan working with him on his game. He seems to get the best out of his players and highlights their strong suits. Look at that guy from La Tech, Millsap, in his 1st year he dominated the boards and made shots when it counted.
ohhhhhh, i dont know about that. horford is a much better defender, conditioning isnt an issue and he really developed a nice touch from 8' in. horford is the much safer bet.
I was scrolling through the early draft entrants and to my surprise we have 2 players from LSU on the list. The other is Tac Minor, looks like he wised up a bit and took himself out of the draft. What was he thinking in the 1st place? http://www.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/07nbaearlyentries.html
While it's certainly debatable, consider the following: 1. Big Baby was consistently double and triple teamed in the SEC. Horford rarely demanded the attention. Glen averaged 17+ ppg, Al averaged 13+ ppg. 2. Conditioning? Big Baby averaged 35 mpg. Horford 27 mpg. 3. Shooting? Horford shot a better fg% overall, 60% vs. Big Baby's 49%, but Glen showed he could shoot it from the outside, with 35% of his threes made (on a good number of them), and Horford rarely shot it from far, going 0 for 3. Glen was 71% from the charity stripe versus Horford's 64%. 4. Rebounding. Glen averaged 10.4 rpg. Horford, 9.5. This is probably a draw, but I don't think Horford had multiple bodies on him all night long. While I don't debate that Horford is likely to be taken higher, I'd say that Florida made him look better than he actually is. It's easier to score follow up dunks and inside shots, when teams have to honor Noah, Green, Brewer AND Humphrey--which was essentially Horford's game--he was Florida's Tyrus. Horford is probably a "better" athlete, and because he's lighter, a better up and down player, but I'd still argue that Glen is more skilled and polished and has just as much potential. I have a feeling that a team that gambles on Big Baby in the late first round or early second is really going to get as good a player as Horford in two to three years--and that's why he's trying out with a lot of teams. Big Baby just needs to get on a full time conditioning schedule, with a dedicated year round pro staff, and I could see him playing at around 270 to 275, with more muscle and less body fat, and really being a pretty decent player. Horford may be the safer bet, but I'd still take Glen in a head to head straight up game.
Looks like Big Baby also is working out with Miami. Shaq' and Big Baby on the same frontline (an heir apparent to one I've compared him to, Udonis Haslem )? http://www.2theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/8084052.html Miami drafts with the 20th pick in the first and the 9th pick in the second...
i dont want to give the impression that i dont think glen can be a good nba player, but i do think the odds are that horford will be better. as evidence, i refer again to ken pomeroy's stats. http://kenpom.com/sr.php?team=Louisiana%20St. he breaks down stats to basically normalize them per possession, because its a bit misleading to compare # of rebounds a game of two players with substantially different amount of pt. comparing horford to davis davis' relative strengths--basically nothing, they are both good rebounders with glen being a bit stronger on the offensive end and horford better on the defensive end. horford's relative strengths--ft rate (how often he gets to the line), eFG%, blocks, and pomeroy's overall offensive rating. surprisingly, horford took only a few less shots than glen (as a % of the teams shots) of course this doesnt account for a lot of things like how the players are used and how other teams play them. however i do think its better than just comparing # of pts and rebounds/game. how bout this? what happens to each team if you switch players? honestly, i dont have a solid opinion about it. but in the end, TGer'nLHornLand, i disagree with you on glen's future, because your assessment of his chances are dependent on his losing (more)weight (and keeping it off), and there is just not a good track record of players doing this.
