Durant at the Bench Press

I think you'd have to be a little crazy to let the fact that Kevin Durant flubbed the bench press at the NBA Draft Combine very seriously. I doubt the Titans are regretting taking Vince Young at number three despite his poor wonderlic score. This combine info is probably useful to have when you're looking at the lesser prospects -- you figure that when it comes to labeling one guy the 13th best prospect in the draft and another guy the 14th best the scouts are 97 percent full of shit so you may as well assemble some quantitative info about how strong they are -- but seems useless with top guys.

All-in-all, I feel like the sports media has been depressed by how clearcut the number one and number two picks are this year and have been trying to gin up first silly reasons why Durant might go higher than Oden and now why Durant's stock might slip.

Photo by Wikipedian Corpx, used under a Creative Commons license.

Comments

Yup. The kid's a kid. He'll likely never be a beefy fellow, but he'll grow and become as strong as he needs to.

Posted by sherifffruittfly | June 6, 2007 3:35 PM

This TrueHoop post was good on the irrelevance of NBA combine numbers.

Posted by ogged | June 6, 2007 3:35 PM

I have a deep suspicion that Kwame Brown's career to date is also proof of irrelevance.

Posted by SomeCallMeTim | June 6, 2007 3:37 PM

As a slow untalented hoop aspirant who couldn't make his high school varsity squad, I am confident that the ability to bench press 185 lbs. is meaningless with respect to having NBA skills. Even in my late 40s I can still bench press more than 185, yet I have become almost tree like in terms of speed. I don't think the ability to bench press is going to make up for something essential like quickness, leaping ability, shooting range and touch, ball handling and general ability to play the game.

I think the only strength measure I would really be interested in is leg strength. Or maybe even military presses. But the bench press -- it just doesn't seem to have anything to do with basketball.

Posted by Klein's Tiny Left Nut | June 6, 2007 3:41 PM

I agree that the bench press thing should be no big deal (the Sonics commented that when he was a High school Sr. Robert Swift couldn't bench 185 at the combine either, now 3 years of working out with the professional trainers an NBA team is able to provide and he is the strongest guy on the team)

What really stands out from the combine though is Oden's performance, a 7 footer with his vertical jumping and quickness? Wow!

Posted by Eric | June 6, 2007 3:56 PM

The True Hoop post states that Durant also had a very poor time in the agility drill - 78th out of 80. If Durant is not quick enough to guard a 3 on the perimeter, he will have to beef up sooner rather than later so that he can guard 4s and 5s in the post.

The True Hoop post also points that Durant did virtually no test prep, so you are comparing Durant's natural ability against 79 players (including Oden) who have been specifically prepping for these drills.

Great example to use in comparing the SAT scores of kids from non-college prep schools from those who grow up believing that Stanley Kaplan is a necessary component if life. If test prep can make Spencer Hawes look quicker than Kevin Durant, maybe it is making upper-middle class test prepper seem more promising than inner city cold test taker.

Posted by Ephus | June 6, 2007 3:59 PM

A very big part of benching ability is arm length. For tall, lanky guys like Durant it's much harder than for guys with short arms. Most world class bench-pressers have short arms for their size. Don't sweat it.

Posted by Freddie | June 6, 2007 4:02 PM

Being tall can be a disadvantage in bench pressing because it means a longer range of motion. This is especially true for people whose arms are long, proportionate to height. It's no surprise that top powerlifters tend to be barrel-chested with relatively short arms.

According to the combine results chart posted in the Seattle Times, Durant is 6'9" tall without shoes and has a "wingspan" of 7'4.75". Compared to other players of similar height that appears to be a large wingspan, so Durant probably does have proportionately longer arms than most other prospects. That would put him at a disadvantage in the bench press due to the extra-long range of motion. Even so, not being able to compete even one rep is pretty bad.

Posted by Peter` | June 6, 2007 4:04 PM

Pure silliness. Your average trainer at Bally's could probably have Durant benching 185 for ten reps with about three months worth of work. It barely qualifies as a skill.

Posted by owenz | June 6, 2007 4:21 PM

As far as Durant doing poorly on the agility drills, I'll give a shit about that once you show me one bit of evidence that the drills are correlated with a guy's actual in-game skills.

Certainly Oden's results are incredible. But I don't think Durant's mean much. As Henry Abbot pointed out, Andre Iguodala's vert tested as only an inch or two better than JJ Redick's.

I still think Oden will be a superstar while Durant will be a superduperduperstar. But my confidence that Durant will be better isn't much above 50%. It's certainly a safer pick to take Oden. And if Portland really wants Durant, they should trade picks with Seattle and take Durant at #2. I bet Seattle would give up a lot to move up one pick.

The reason Oden is a safer pick is that I don't see any possibly universe in which he isn't one of the top 3 defensive players in the game within a couple years. I've never seen anybody with a better combination of size, speed, agility and shotblocking instincts.

Posted by too many steves | June 6, 2007 4:27 PM

good call on the depressed media, matt. they are making shit up to try and create a story.

very interested to see who my 'wolves get at 7. if conley is on the board and they leave him there, of my.....

Posted by notchris | June 6, 2007 4:38 PM

I am still confused as to whether Durant is supposed to play the 3 or the 4. Assuming it is the 3, then the bench is less important (although agility drills are). At the 4, I could see strength (as measuered by bench press) as pretty useful.

Posted by Al | June 6, 2007 4:39 PM

Arm length can be a real hindrance in being good at the bench press. Almost everyone I knew who bench 300 lbs had thick stubby arms. But certainly a trainer could improve him pretty quickly in this regard.

I just tend to think the strength associated with bench pressing, i.e. strength in the pecs, is not very applicable on the basketball court. I think the strength you look for there tends to be in the quads, glutes, and hamstrings, the ability to hold a position and use your body to move people. It's like being able to curl a lot of weight. It gives you those nice looking biceps, but its athletic applicability is virtually nil.

Posted by Klein's Tiny Left Nut | June 6, 2007 4:57 PM

The bench press is like height: in and of itself, height isn't terribly important in basketball, it's just a useful proxy for a lot of things that are (wingspan, standing reach, how high you can get when you jump). Height per se pretty much only matters in terms of court vision. (My favorite scouting report ever: Draft Express on Shelden Williams, commenting that at least two inches of his height were wasted because he had such a long head.)

Bench press itself doesn't really matter a great deal, I think even if Durant were to play the 4 - it's not like there's a great deal of pushing with the arms in legally played basketball. I'm not sure how good a proxy it is for things like hand strength and pull-strength, which are more important.

And come on, look at the length of that kid's arms, look at how skinny they are, and you're surprised he can't bench his own weight? It's a lot less shameful than when Al Jefferson couldn't bench 185 and he was like 275 at the time.

Posted by Quarterican | June 6, 2007 4:57 PM

Kevin Durant has the capacity to become a superstar, but his talent is useless if he gets injured. Not being able to bench 185 won't cause him to fall in the draft, but it'd really be wise for him to bulk up.

Posted by Matthew Struhar | June 6, 2007 5:42 PM

Off Topic but maybe of interest - Oden has a blog:

http://www.yardbarker.com/users/gregoden

From his post ont he combines:

"Today was my physical. I did much better than I thought I would in the shuttle run, 3/4 court sprint and the vertical jump. I could have done the bench press but I got a little nervous and got out of it. I don't think I was supposed to do it anyway, but there was no one to tell them. After the testing we had a light work out, which involved a lot of turn around, off the block jump shots, which was ok. I usually shoot hooks, but it's good to learn something new. At the end of the workout we had to shoot an NBA three-point shot. I definitely air-balled mine. Afterwards, I was just shooting around doing my best "Along Came Polly" impression of "letting in rain" and "iceman." I hit 2 in a row! Maybe I should say that everytime I shoot a NBA three-point shot...."

Posted by Tiparillo | June 6, 2007 5:59 PM

Bench pressing as such isn't important. It is, if only by accident, a fair proxy for strength simply because few people who do what it takes to get strong don't end up at least adequate bench pressers. His ability to squat would be a far more relevant test of basketball-related strength, but looking at him, he probably sucks at that, too. Given his demonstrated athletic ability, it's pretty clear that on any sensible program he could become significantly stronger over the first two years of his career, and he ought to do that.

Posted by CJColucci | June 6, 2007 6:33 PM

Durant can get stronger. This is not a big deal.

That said, for those asserting the irrelevance of upper body strength to basketball success, please see, e.g., Malone, Karl, and Boozer, Carlos.

Posted by Josh | June 6, 2007 6:50 PM

I have a suggestion: put huge amounts of effort into proof-reading your first sentence in every post.

When the first sentence doesn't scan, I lose interest fast.

Posted by HyperIon | June 6, 2007 6:52 PM

Strength, even upper body, does matter if you want to play the low post in the NBA. But we already know Durant can't do that coming into the league. He will need to bulk up, which will be easier as he trains and as he gets older.

The media is probably talking about this b/c its fairly remarkable, and the NFL combine has become really popular. In the NFL combine they bench 225 lbs. And combine measurables matter. Being able to bench a lot doesn't guarantee football strength, but its a decent data point.

One of the big differences, however, is that if you are a football player going through the combine, you have already spent 3 years at a football program bulking up. And you will be pressing anywhere from 10-40 reps at 225. That is not easy to do and where ever you at at the combine, you are probably not going to be able to improve all that much. With Durant showing so little strength, it would be really easy for him to get quite a bit stronger.

Posted by mpowell | June 6, 2007 7:18 PM

I am interested to see what happens when someone takes Durant down to the post. A Ron Artest, for example. I have this feeling Durant will get destroyed. But who knows.

Posted by Al | June 6, 2007 7:26 PM

I wasn't suggesting that upper body strenght isn't important in the NBA, but that the bench press is a relatively poor proxy for the kind of strength that is useful.

Kevin McHale was one of the four or five best post players I ever saw, but I doubt he was a stud on the bench press. I may be wrong, but just looking at his build I'd be willing to bet on it.

You can also be built like a stud and play like a pussy -- any of you old enough to remeber Charle Smith of the Knicks knows what I'm talking about.

Posted by Klein's tiny left nut | June 6, 2007 7:49 PM

Man I'm tired of sportswriters and others chirping about Vince Young. He had a good year? Great. Let's see him repeat his success over the next five seasons.

Really, when it comes to sampling methodologies, declaring Young a Great Success after half a season or so isn't terribly bright.

Posted by hellhound | June 6, 2007 8:01 PM

I am strong, yet I am a very poor basketball player. Kevin Durant is weak, yet he is a very good basketball player. Were I not as strong, I would likely be an even worse basketball player. Were Kevin Durant stronger, he would likely be an even better basketball player. I am such a bad basketball player, my strength isn't particularly helpful. Kevin Durant is such a good basketball player, his strength isn't particularly hurtful.

Is there more to it than that?

Posted by bill | June 6, 2007 11:52 PM

"With Durant showing so little strength, it would be really easy for him to get quite a bit stronger."

Sure, but strong enough? I'm skeptical. Shawn Livingston, Allen Iverson, and Richard Hamilton were all rails when they came into the league and they still are. Two of those guys did pretty well, but not with strength. Others hit a wall because the NBA is a man's game. Durant is not a strong kid, people did not need the draft combine to figure that out.

Strength is a big asset in the NBA at any position. You could see that pretty clearly if you watched Deron Williams in the playoffs. You've got to have skills as well--Troy Bell is a classic example of the fallacy that any athletic guy can be molded into a good pro. Durant is still the second best prospect, but Bill Simmons' irrational hype about the guy is going to be deflated. My guess is that he'll eventually be a bit of an upgrade over Rashard Lewis for the Sonics, at a cheaper price for a while. Portland's the team that hit the jackpot.

Posted by Jeremiah J. | June 7, 2007 2:14 AM

McHale was very strong. Ever see him in the post? Maybe not Mailman strong. Karl Malone treated Charles Barkley like a rag doll, IIRC.

Durant would need to beef up to play the post in the NBA. Anybody who cannot defend the post in the NBA is a defensive liability, even if they play point guard.

Having said that, it is now clear that the first four teams should clearly pass on the flawed Durant.

More seriously, the really important aspect of the draft is the ability to find the players like Kobe Bryant, Paul Pierce and Tracy McGrady who are passed on by many teams but end up playing at an All-Star level. Players like Barkley and Malone were not hyped coming out of college. Even Michael Jordan sank to #3.

Posted by Whispers | June 7, 2007 4:42 AM

I think some of you guys may be forgetting (or didn't watch) some of the games he played in the college season... I mean he was incredible.

Posted by Freddie | June 7, 2007 8:21 AM

Again my point wasn't that McHale wasn't strong. I saw him many times in person and he was just extraordinary in the post and was a pretty physical guy. But what made him so good was his tremendous wing span, his exceptionally good hands and timing, and his shocking athleticism and quickness despite looking like he was built by committee. He almost always covered the small forwards and Bird covered the power forwards.

I was speculating that he probably would not have had the world's most impressive bench press numbers just based on his freakishly long arms, his unimpressive upper arms, and generally strange build.

But the guy was one of the greats.

Posted by Klein's Tiny Left Nut | June 7, 2007 3:40 PM

Durant is a skinny kid who is a freakishly talented athlete. He runs very well, has great hands and is an exceptional shooter. He shot over 90% from the line for a significant part of the season. His feet are enormous, something like size 18. The kid obviously has a ways to go before he is physically mature.

This is not a bug, it is a feature.

Posted by Nat | June 7, 2007 8:18 PM