I don't have a dog in this fight, but I think it's unfair to penalize Drummond because he only plays one sport. How many 6'11 guys have ever played in the MLB or NFL? I can't think of a single one off the top of my head.
Mark Hendrickson is the only 6'10+ guy I can think of who ever played in MLB.
Randy Johnson?Mark Hendrickson is the only 6'10+ guy I can think of who ever played in MLB.
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.
I never thought I would see someone denigrating Drummond's athleticsm by pointing to his terrible free throw shooting, this board never ceases to amaze.
Bo and Deion didn't play basketball (that I'm aware of), but we all know Scottie could have been a football star too.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.
Thanks, exactly right. We are debating who's the best natural athlete so might need to point out where, why & how a great athlete differs compared to another great athlete.You are seriously misunderstanding the argument here. Nobody (ok, one guy who hasn't posted since) is debating the fact that he's an elite athlete. "Not as athletic as Scott Burrell" ≠ "Poor athlete".
If I wanted to argue like you, I'd say that Rico was "denigrating" Burrell's athleticism because he doesn't compare as favorably to the two best athletes on the planet in the second half of the 2oth century. I won't, because I know that's not what he meant.
Dwight Howard was drafted over Emeka and everyone at the time thought the Magic were crazy. Emeka has to play his tail off to get a double double, Dwight can goof off and get 20 and 20. To me natural athleticism is making it look easy, there are many examples you can use in different sports.
True, but that was mostly about the fact that we'd watched Emeka excel at BBall for 3yrs and we'd never seen Dwight Howard play. It was also still in the shadow of Kwame Brown of similar ballyhooed athleticism being a complete bust. Emeka did win ROY and very likely would have been closer to Howard were it not for his back issues. But Howard was the correct #1 pick due to his athleticism.Dwight Howard was drafted over Emeka and everyone at the time thought the Magic were crazy. Emeka has to play his tail off to get a double double, Dwight can goof off and get 20 and 20. To me natural athleticism is making it look easy, there are many examples you can use in different sports.
So playing professionally in 2 sports (and being a top prospect in a third before giving it up) without being exclusively dedicated to either isn't "making it look easy"?
The best argument for Drummond is that athleticism like he has is much more scarce in guys his size. Not enough to overcome a guy who did things that nobody had done previously.
C'mon now, AD plays only basketball because times are different than in the 80's?! I'm pretty sure specializing in one sport has been commonplace for quite some time now. I don't recall Dr. J having to peddle insurance while in the ABA or work through pro tennis rankings in summers at UMass. Although it is essentially true that Andre was born at the wrong time and had he been a 70's baby he'd have tons of acid washed jeans, a mullet, listen to a lot of rock ballads and be a 6'10" second baseman for the Blue Jays.Like I said AD situation is different from Burrell's. We have no idea how good AD would be in another sport times are different now then they were in the 80s I'm sure AD had a pretty good idea he would be in the NBA when you know that you concentrate on one sport.
I'm not misunderstanding any argument, another poster said if Drummond is such a great athlete why is he such a bad free throw shooter? It's an absurd argument and you clearly seem to be missing the point.You are seriously misunderstanding the argument here. Nobody (ok, one guy who hasn't posted since) is debating the fact that he's an elite athlete. "Not as athletic as Scott Burrell" ≠ "Poor athlete".
If I wanted to argue like you, I'd say that Rico was "denigrating" Burrell's athleticism because he doesn't compare as favorably to the two best athletes on the planet in the second half of the 2oth century. I won't, because I know that's not what he meant.
Sure there is; Scott Burrell.This is the most overblown argument of all time because the two sides can't even agree on a specific definition of athleticism.
You might as well settle on that FIRST, and then compare players. Heck, I'm not even sure there IS a specific definition.
Too funny.I can't believe this is going on. It's Burrell, and it's not even close.
Forget other sports. Burrell's vertical leap, and lateral quickness, are hard to describe if you didn't see him play. It's Burrell who literally jumped over a future NBA star and took the ball from him without fouling (or anyone even understanding what happened). It's Burrell who came out of a corner to knock Shaq's stuff into the stands without Shaq even having a clue who stuffed him and where he had come from. It's Burrell of whom Raftery once said, "if you didn't see what that UFO was it was Scotty Burrell."
Even if you are talking about nothing other than speed, quickness, hops and agility, it's Burrell.
Sure there is; Scott Burrell.
This is the most overblown argument of all time because the two sides can't even agree on a specific definition of athleticism.
You might as well settle on that FIRST, and then compare players. Heck, I'm not even sure there IS a specific definition.
I agree. Some see this as excellence in a sport, others as ability to quickly & easily become proficient in multiple sports and some see it as running, jumping & strength.