Blake Griffin's Measurements.

illastrate · Post #1 » by **illastrate** » Fri May 29, 2009 4:13 pm

Height(no shoes) - 6'8.5
Height(with shoes) - 6'10
Weight - 248
Wingspan - 6'11.25
Standing reach - 8'9

http://www.draftexpress.com/article/Mea ... ased-3236/

So he is 6'10" after all. Thought his reach would've been higher, but thank goodness for his 39" vertical.

BTW, check out Thabeet's measurements. Dude's a freak of nature.

Post #2 » by **thanumba2clippersfan** » Fri May 29, 2009 7:05 pm

Griffin does have good size

richboy · Post #3 » by **richboy** » Fri May 29, 2009 7:24 pm

Short alligator arms. His reach is equal to the average SF. You don't play basketball with your head. Reach is far more important. Kind of amazing he is almost a half foot shorter than Elton Brand with arms up. Despite being taller.

madmaxmedia · Post #4 » by **madmaxmedia** » Fri May 29, 2009 8:18 pm

I think that is okay, given his strength. He is more than strong enough to play NBA PF, plus the vertical helps.

You don't play basketball with your head, but neither do you play with feet planted on the floor.

richboy · Post #5 » by **richboy** » Fri May 29, 2009 8:46 pm

I can't find a player that has any kind of post game with a standing reach under 9 feet. Seems like about 9'1 is what you want to start to be a legit post player. He is well below 9 feet. We now see why he had no defensive impact with OK. If he turns into a face up PF that can't play defense I would have to look at Rubio. Who length and size at his position is no problem. As he would be one of the biggest longest PGs in the game.

Matter of fact its being said that the measurements are being generous. That many players that were at the combine last year are measuring a half inch taller.

Post #6 » by **thanumba2clippersfan** » Fri May 29, 2009 8:46 pm

madmaxmedia wrote:I think that is okay, given his strength. He is more than strong enough to play NBA PF, plus the vertical helps.

You don't play basketball with your head, but neither do you play with feet planted on the floor.

Great point, he may not have the wingspan but he does have the vertical.

connseanery · Post #7 » by **connseanery** » Fri May 29, 2009 9:04 pm

It's strange that the wingspan didn't match what was measured earlier by Oklahoma athletics. They said he had a 7' 1/2" inch wingspan.

On ESPNU this morning, they showed Griffin on the vertical jump tests and he seemed impressive on those. On the max vert, he came within 3 inches of the top of the measurement device.

madmaxmedia · Post #8 » by **madmaxmedia** » Fri May 29, 2009 9:11 pm

Don't worry guys, I have it on good authority that he 'runs the floor well.'

illastrate · Post #9 » by **illastrate** » Fri May 29, 2009 9:33 pm

connseanery wrote:It's strange that the wingspan didn't match what was measured earlier by Oklahoma athletics. They said he had a 7' 1/2" inch wingspan.

On ESPNU this morning, they showed Griffin on the vertical jump tests and he seemed impressive on those. On the max vert, he came within 3 inches of the top of the measurement device.

So which is it? 6'11.25" or 7'.5"? Either way, the Clips have to draft him. You can't put all your stock into these measurements.

connseanery · Post #10 » by **connseanery** » Fri May 29, 2009 10:01 pm

It probably isn't necessarily accurate in all cases. Some guys have to be stretching harder on the vertical reach. Danny Granger for example was 6' 8 1/2" in shoes with 7' 1 1'2" wingspan with only 8' 7" vertical reach. Maybe some guys stretch with all their effort and others just stick their hand up.

In the end players will be graded on how they perform on the court. if a player struggles against taller players than you can take a look at their wingspan/vertical touch to find out possible reasons why but if they don't have any problems then you can't read too much into these measurements.

richboy · Post #11 » by **richboy** » Fri May 29, 2009 10:09 pm

That is the problem. Griffin goes from being biggest player on the floor to now a league where he will have less reach than many SFs. Al Thornton standing reach is almost equal to Blake Griffin. PFs in the NBA will shoot over him all day.

connseanery · Post #12 » by **connseanery** » Fri May 29, 2009 10:25 pm

Post players always shoot over each other. Post defense is about fighting for position and not giving the offensive player a comfortable spot on the floor to execute their post moves/shots. Griffin's ability to be a good defender is going to depend if he's willing to work to root people out of the post.

Pau Gasol is tall and has a great reach but he's not considered a great post defender. You have to battle to keep players from establishing position or people are going to score over you no matter your reach.

richboy · Post #13 » by **richboy** » Fri May 29, 2009 11:16 pm

You have to have reach. Its not a guarantee you succeed. Is there one great interior defender with short arms. I can't think of one now. I can't think of one in history.

Its kind of amazing that a guy 6'10 in height has such short arms. There are guards with reach like his.

scratch21 · Post #14 » by **scratch21** » Fri May 29, 2009 11:51 pm

what if they move him to the 3 and SF

Forte IV · Post #15 » by **Forte IV** » Sat May 30, 2009 12:08 am

DeJaun Blair is shorter then I expected. I thought he was 6'7 in shoes but hes only a little over 6'5. Tyreke Evans has a great wingspan for a guard, the same measurements as Griffin for wingspan. 6'11.

connseanery · Post #16 » by **connseanery** » Sat May 30, 2009 12:10 am

"You have to have reach. Its not a guarantee you succeed. Is there one great interior defender with short arms. I can't think of one now. I can't think of one in history."

Kwame Brown
6'10" without shoes, 7'1 wingspan, 9'0" reach. Same proportions as Griffin. wingspan is about 3 inches greater than height. Brown doesn't block shots but he's regarded as one of the better post defenders because he keeps offensive players from establishing position.

Don't confuse shot blocking with being a post defender. Most shot blockers don't actually play solid man on man post defense. They leave their guy and reject shots on other players.

richboy · Post #17 » by **richboy** » Sat May 30, 2009 1:19 am

LOL. This isn't about proportions. Griffin may have the same proportions as Yao Ming. Doesn't mean he will have near the effect on defense because he doesn't have the size. Brown has a 9 foot reach and near 7 feet tall.

Plus you be ignoring the fact that Griffin has completely sucked on defense in college. With players shooting over him repeatedly very easy.

connseanery · Post #18 » by **connseanery** » Sat May 30, 2009 3:24 am

No one said that Griffin currently is a good defender. He lets opponents establish too good of position in the paint. You can have a huge wingspan but if the guy you're guarding pins you on his back and moves you under the basket, he'll score on you.

Kwame Brown is a "7 footer" with a mediocre wingspan and vertical reach but holds his position against offensive players. The centers he guards often have huge reach advantages on him but he still does a good job defending them.

If Griffin can work hard to establish position then he can be a solid defender too. He doesn't need to block shots. Players rarely block shots on their own man anyways.

jflipclip · Post #19 » by **jflipclip** » Sat May 30, 2009 5:47 am

It's definitely worth noting, but I don't know about the long-term effect this will have. DX says Tyreke Evans has an identical reach.. does that not concern anyone? Either way, it doesn't effect is athleticism.

illastrate · Post #20 » by **illastrate** » Sat May 30, 2009 6:21 am

Michael Olowokandi had a 7'8" wingspan, that must've sold it for alot of teams huh? Bonafide superstar, right? :lol: