Best natural Athlete | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Best natural Athlete

Status
Not open for further replies.

intlzncster

i fart in your general direction
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
29,094
Reaction Score
60,516
I think people are confusing "skilled" and "athletic." Burrell is incredibly skilled in a number of sports. Drummond is incredibly athletic. If you combined Scott's skill with Andre's athleticism, you'd have an unbelievable talent.

If you simply made Burrell 7' tall, you'd probably consider him a greater athlete than Andre Drummond.

The gold standard of athleticism--ie the worlds greatest athlete--has traditionally been the decathlete (I don't know if that's right or not, but it is what it is.), which is a combination of both athleticism and skill/technique. Coordination, the root of skill/technique, is a large part of athleticism. Pretty hard to completely separate the two.
 

CAHUSKY

UConn Class of 2013
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
98
Reaction Score
12,078
I think people are confusing "skilled" and "athletic." Burrell is incredibly skilled in a number of sports. Drummond is incredibly athletic. If you combined Scott's skill with Andre's athleticism, you'd have an unbelievable talent.
Which athletic attributes do you think Drummond is more superior in? Just wondering which attributes you consider athletic and which are skills.
 
Joined
Sep 16, 2011
Messages
48,024
Reaction Score
161,524
If you simply made Burrell 7' tall, you'd probably consider him a greater athlete than Andre Drummond.

The gold standard of athleticism--ie the worlds greatest athlete--has traditionally been the decathlete (I don't know if that's right or not, but it is what it is.), which is a combination of both athleticism and skill/technique. Coordination, the root of skill/technique, is a large part of athleticism. Pretty hard to completely separate the two.
If you think the world's top decathletes are the best athletes in the world then I completely disagree with you. There are a bunch of guys playing in the NFL and NBA that if you trained them for a substantial period of time would become the top decathlete, the top athletes don't train for the decathlon because there is money in it. As I stated in another post there are also a pretty substantial amount of athletes that could play D! in multiple sports but if an athlete has aspirations of playing a sport professionally there is no sense in training for multiple spots. I remember years ago when Tony Ortiz from Waterbury was running faster times in the 100 and 110 hurdles than the top decathletes for the US, I'm sure given his size and strength he could be taught to throw things far as well. He picked football and played at Nebraska but never made the NFL, I'm sure the dreams of playing in the NFL was a much bigger draw than becoming a decathlete.
 

nelsonmuntz

Point Center
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
43,953
Reaction Score
32,129
I am not sure how we ended up on Drummond vs. Burrell. I think Rudy Gay is the best athlete that UConn has ever had, but Burrell, Drummond, Cliff Robinson (played 3 positions), Donyell, Marcus Johnson, Tony Robertson, Caron, Kemba and Boat all belong in the discussion. Denham belongs the next level down because he was a little slow for a top athlete. There are certainly some others I missed.

Burrell was a great athlete, but he was also so smart that he was several moves ahead of the other players, which made him seem quicker and more athletic than he was.
 

intlzncster

i fart in your general direction
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
29,094
Reaction Score
60,516
If you think the world's top decathletes are the best athletes in the world then I completely disagree with you. There are a bunch of guys playing in the NFL and NBA that if you trained them for a substantial period of time would become the top decathlete, the top athletes don't train for the decathlon because there is money in it. As I stated in another post there are also a pretty substantial amount of athletes that could play D! in multiple sports but if an athlete has aspirations of playing a sport professionally there is no sense in training for multiple spots. I remember years ago when Tony Ortiz from Waterbury was running faster times in the 100 and 110 hurdles than the top decathletes for the US, I'm sure given his size and strength he could be taught to throw things far as well. He picked football and played at Nebraska but never made the NFL, I'm sure the dreams of playing in the NFL was a much bigger draw than becoming a decathlete.

The point was not that decathletes today are the world's greatest athletes. It was simply that a measure of athletic ability should include coordination in it's definition (balance being a key component). Just because some guy can run faster than another, doesn't necessarily mean he's a better athlete. How about if I guy can scale a vertical peak faster than him? Or swim faster or longer or whatever? Is running more important than swimming? Are there some sort of specific and exact metrics that define athleticism?

For what it's worth, I don't think Drummond was the best UCONN athlete. I'd put Boatright over him pound for pound.
 
Last edited:

Rico444

In the mix for six
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,608
Reaction Score
28,911
Which athletic attributes do you think Drummond is more superior in? Just wondering which attributes you consider athletic and which are skills.

I tend to separate them this way: skills can be developed through repetition, while athletic abilities are natural and can't be improved upon. Although I guess if you wanted to, you could say someone could run faster if they lost weight or put on muscle in their legs. I would still consider speed an athletic trait.

I also think you have to consider someone's height when talking about athleticism. The bigger you are, the more force is required to move your body around. That's why most seven-footers move like Enocsh Wolf, and why guards usually have higher verticals than power forwards. So that Drummond is athletic at all is impressive, and when you step back and look at HOW athletic he is, you realize how incredible it is.

Now, I'm not going to chime in on who is the more athletic of the two, since it's very difficult to compare across positions because of the height difference. Also, I'm too young to have watched Burrell play outside of highlight videos. But I think the best way to compare the two is through how each stacked up athletically (is that a word?) against players at the same position. I think that's why so many people are going with Drummond; you just don't see big guys that do what he can.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
I think people are confusing "skilled" and "athletic." Burrell is incredibly skilled in a number of sports. Drummond is incredibly athletic. If you combined Scott's skill with Andre's athleticism, you'd have an unbelievable talent.

Right. Just ignore the fact that he could jump out of (*$&ing building and was easily the fastest guy on the team while here.

Once we accept that skill and coordination are part of athleticism Burrell stands out.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
4,205
Reaction Score
7,074
First off, Burrell was a role player in the NBA. I don't see how that's at all arguable. He was great at UConn, and I'm not taking anything away from him, but he was a role player in the NBA.

Secondly, the reason I think you have something against Drummond has to do with your little "tie his shoes" dig in one of your posts.

Drummond posted a 10.83 in the lane agility drills in pre-draft testing, which was a top 10 number in that draft. In the history of pre-draft testing, there's only been one guy over 250 pounds who's had a better number in the lane agility drills. You speculating on his ability to defend forwards and guards is just that, speculation. One of the main premises of your argument is based off of something that you've completely made up in your head, this notion that he can't defend on the perimeter. According to Synergy, when he stepped out to guard the pick and roll guy, the player only shot the ball twice all year, which is pretty indicative of his ability to defend on the perimeter.

My other problem is that you paint Burrell as if he's a rich man's Bruce Bowen as a defender, when Drummond is only 20 years old and already has a higher average defensive rating than Burrell did.

We probably have different definitions of what a "natural athlete" is, which is fine.
If Drummond is such a great natural athlete why was it so difficult for him to shoot free throws? Here's something in the one game that he plays that he doesn't have the coordination to do well. Drummond might be the most explosive athlete but the best natural athlete seems like trying to fit Drummond's unique and exceptional athletic talents into the wrong box.

If we did a 10 sport Olympics and drafted all UConn players ever, Burrell and Dropo are the top picks regardless of the 10 sports.
Burrell = natural athlete
Drummond = freak athleticism
 

Rico444

In the mix for six
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,608
Reaction Score
28,911
Right. Just ignore the fact that he could jump out of (*$&ing building and was easily the fastest guy on the team while here.

Once we accept that skill and coordination are part of athleticism Burrell stands out.

Did you read my post right above yours?
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
Yes, I did, though it was not visible while I was replying. The biggest issue I have with it is the statement that skills can be developed through repetition. Can marginal improvements be made? Sure. But a guy with no coordination is still going to be uncoordinated no matter how much time you spend trying to develop him.

And that's what separates Burrell from Drummond, IMO. Remember that you're discussing two guys that are 10's in terms of speed, quickness, leaping ability, strength, etc.
 

intlzncster

i fart in your general direction
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
29,094
Reaction Score
60,516
I tend to separate them this way: skills can be developed through repetition, while athletic abilities are natural and can't be improved upon. Although I guess if you wanted to, you could say someone could run faster if they lost weight or put on muscle in their legs. I would still consider speed an athletic trait.

But Speed, quickness, strength and hops can also be developed through repetition in training. Is their a ceiling? Sure, but there is in terms of coordination as well.
 

Rico444

In the mix for six
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,608
Reaction Score
28,911
Yes, I did, though it was not visible while I was replying. The biggest issue I have with it is the statement that skills can be developed through repetition. Can marginal improvements be made? Sure. But a guy with no coordination is still going to be uncoordinated no matter how much time you spend trying to develop him.

And that's what separates Burrell from Drummond, IMO. Remember that you're discussing two guys that are 10's in terms of speed, quickness, leaping ability, strength, etc.

Burrell was obviously much more coordinated than Drummond, I would concede that. But I don't necessarily agree that both were 10s in those categories you listed. If you're 6'6 or 6'7", you're judged differently than if you're 6'11 or 7'0. Drummond is already one of the best centers in the league after two years, Burrell was never close to that level even before the injuries. If he was a world-class athlete for his size, then I can't see how he would fail to get to that level.
 

Rico444

In the mix for six
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,608
Reaction Score
28,911
But Speed, quickness, strength and hops can also be developed through repetition in training. Is their a ceiling? Sure, but there is in terms of coordination as well.

Athleticism is just really difficult to define, I guess. Part of how it should be defined I'm is how it's applied in the sports world. Hand-eye coordination isn'tusually synonymous with athletic. When Prince Fielder turns on an inside 96 MPH fastball and lines a double down the 1st base line, the announcer usually won't say "Wow, what athleticism!"
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
3,023
Reaction Score
3,684
If Drummond is such a great natural athlete why was it so difficult for him to shoot free throws? Here's something in the one game that he plays that he doesn't have the coordination to do well. Drummond might be the most explosive athlete but the best natural athlete seems like trying to fit Drummond's unique and exceptional athletic talents into the wrong box.

If we did a 10 sport Olympics and drafted all UConn players ever, Burrell and Dropo are the top picks regardless of the 10 sports.
Burrell = natural athlete
Drummond = freak athleticism

Are you asking me why Drummond isn't able to be a flawless all-around player?

Why did Burrell get shelled during his first season of pro baseball? Even after focusing on one sport, basketball, why did Burrell end up being inferior to Drummond in nearly every single major statistical category in the NBA?
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
4,205
Reaction Score
7,074
Are you asking me why Drummond isn't able to be a flawless all-around player?

Why did Burrell get shelled during his first season of pro baseball? Even after focusing on one sport, basketball, why did Burrell end up being inferior to Drummond in nearly every single major statistical category in the NBA?
No one is arguing about who is a more effective basketball player. Nonetheless Burrell was a more effective baseball and football player, regardless of getting 'shelled'. I recall Burrell having a pretty decent minor league season during one of his UConn summers. I think that's pretty good for a guy playing two sports. Badmouthing Burrell will never make Drummond a better natural athlete.

Yes, I'm asking if Drummond is such a good natural athlete why can't he shoot free throws. Please note that citing Burrell's 3ptFG% will not be accepted as a rebuttal.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
3,023
Reaction Score
3,684
No one is arguing about who is a more effective basketball player. Nonetheless Burrell was a more effective baseball and football player, regardless of getting 'shelled'. I recall Burrell having a pretty decent minor league season during one of his UConn summers. I think that's pretty good for a guy playing two sports. Badmouthing Burrell will never make Drummond a better natural athlete.

Yes, I'm asking if Drummond is such a good natural athlete why can't he shoot free throws. Please note that citing Burrell's 3ptFG% will not be accepted as a rebuttal.

I just don't think that's a valid argument. I have no idea what you're trying to prove. Michael Jordan is universally considered to be a great natural athlete and he struggled to shoot 3's. He shot below 20% from 3 for 5 of his 15 seasons in the NBA.

Every player has an area where they have a weakness. It doesn't take away from their athleticism as a whole.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
4,205
Reaction Score
7,074
I just don't think that's a valid argument. I have no idea what you're trying to prove. Michael Jordan is universally considered to be a great natural athlete and he struggled to shoot 3's. He shot below 20% from 3 for 5 of his 15 seasons in the NBA.

Every player has an area where they have a weakness. It doesn't take away from their athleticism as a whole.
Struggling and having a weakness is different that being awkward and the very worst in the league at shooting free throws. Drummond is on pace to have the worst free throw percentage in NBA history (.402 lower than Ben Wallace at .418) and I think has posted bottom-10 worst FT% ever. Drummond struggles with coordination and mentally at the free throw line. It doesn't come naturally.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
3,023
Reaction Score
3,684
Struggling and having a weakness is different that being awkward and the very worst in the league at shooting free throws. Drummond is on pace to have the worst free throw percentage in NBA history (.402 lower than Ben Wallace at .418) and I think has posted bottom-10 worst FT% ever. Drummond struggles with coordination and mentally at the free throw line. It doesn't come naturally.

The problem is you're operating with the idea that free-throw percentage is the best or only way to measure coordination, which isn't true. Even if it were, Drummond's other qualities make up for it.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
4,205
Reaction Score
7,074
The problem is you're operating with the idea that free-throw percentage is the best or only way to measure coordination, which isn't true. Even if it were, Drummond's other qualities make up for it.
Where did I ever say that? FT are a very small piece of the pie, but much like his awkward jump shooting technique while at UConn I think emblematic of how his game doesn't look like it comes natural.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
3,023
Reaction Score
3,684
Where did I ever say that? FT are a very small piece of the pie, but much like his awkward jump shooting technique while at UConn I think emblematic of how his game doesn't look like it comes natural.

I've spent way too much time arguing about this, so I'm going to stop now. But again, I don't think that a poor area of Drummond's game takes away from his overall athleticism. His speed, quickness, coordination, strength, agility, and leaping ability show that he's a great natural athlete, IMO. And to me, his historic success in the NBA as a 19 and 20 year old very much does show that he's a natural athlete.

He had the best PER of any teenager in the history of the NBA, if that doesn't show a natural athleticism or ability I don't know what does.
 
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
8,234
Reaction Score
17,488
Burrell was obviously much more coordinated than Drummond, I would concede that. But I don't necessarily agree that both were 10s in those categories you listed. If you're 6'6 or 6'7", you're judged differently than if you're 6'11 or 7'0. Drummond is already one of the best centers in the league after two years, Burrell was never close to that level even before the injuries. If he was a world-class athlete for his size, then I can't see how he would fail to get to that level.

I think you and john simply have no appreciation for the time and dedication that it takes to play a sport on an elite (i.e. professional) level, which helps you ignore Burrell's ability to do so in multiple sports. You keep concentrating on how good Drummond is in the NBA. Most professional athletes have concentrated on their chosen sport exclusively from their mid-teens. While Drummond picked the game up late, he's been a basketball-only guy since then. Given that he's an elite athlete (and nobody here is debating that despite you taking offense to the suggestion that someone may actually be more athletic) he's developed into a great young player who excels in rebounding, protecting the rim and finishing around the basket but is still struggling in other areas.

Burrell became a solid player in the best league on the planet (averaged 11.5 and 6 shooting 41% from behind the arc the year before his injury and 13 and 5 the year that he got hurt) before getting hurt despite having not actually having concentrated on that sport until the year before he was drafted. Burrell did a bunch of things that had never been done before. First player to be drafted in the first round of two major sports. First college hoops player to accumulate over 1,500 points, 750 rebounds, 275 assists and 300 steals. The ability to play multiple sports on an elite level is nearly irrefutable proof of superior athleticism, and you have failed to address it yet (you've really just conveniently ignored it).
 

Rico444

In the mix for six
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
8,608
Reaction Score
28,911
The ability to play multiple sports on an elite level is nearly irrefutable proof of superior athleticism, and you have failed to address it yet (you've really just conveniently ignored it).

What exactly does "elite" mean? If Scott Burrell played two sports at an elite level, what word would you use to describe what Bo Jackson or Deion Sanders did?

And you say I've ignored what Burrell's done; that's not even close to true. Have you read any of my posts about athleticism vs. skill? We obviously just define athleticism differently. Like I said in the post above, I define athleticism like pretty much every broadcaster and sportswriter do: speed, agility, leaping ability. That's why a guy like Carlos Gomez was touted as one of the most athletic players in baseball even before he started hitting well. That's why Stanley Robinson can have no handle and struggle with his jump shot and still be called the best athlete on the floor in just about every game. And that's why Andre Drummond can come into college for one year, have a disappointing season (based on expectations, anyway) and still be a top-10 lottery pick. He didn't get drafted that high because of his basketball skill.

Look, I'm not trying to bash Scott Burrell. He was a very good player for us and was pretty much the sole reason for The Shot. Like I said before, I was too young to watch him play every day; I don't doubt that most of the boneyard is correct in saying that he was tremendously athletic. I just think that the height difference is probably too large a gap for Burrell to make up.
 

David 76

Forty years a fan
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
Messages
6,131
Reaction Score
15,089
Where I come from "natural athlete" is an expression used for someone who could play anything. That it came easily. It is different from best athlete. Guys that could run like the wind were called fast. Strong guys were called...well strong.
But a guy that could do most anything was called a natural athlete. To me that is Scott. There is room for others opinions.
 

David 76

Forty years a fan
Joined
Nov 8, 2013
Messages
6,131
Reaction Score
15,089
What exactly does "elite" mean? If Scott Burrell played two sports at an elite level, what word would you use to describe what Bo Jackson or Deion Sanders did?.

I describe it as even more amazing than what Burrell did. Something even Michael Jordan could not do. Something Burrell came closer to than Andre. Unfortunately, Bo and Deon did not go to UCONN and like the legendary basketball players that are better than Andre, they don't count.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Online statistics

Members online
278
Guests online
3,195
Total visitors
3,473

Forum statistics

Threads
155,802
Messages
4,032,096
Members
9,865
Latest member
Sad Tiger


Top Bottom