web analytics
<

NBA HD: The Long Sell

With the draft buzz at full tilt, I figured it would be a good time to look at the effect of player length.  Today’s post looks at how a player’s max vertical height (the highest point a player can reach in the air) and how that translated into rebounds at the pro level.  You hear lots about a player’s length and hops at draft time but how does that really affect their actions on the court?

I took the measurements from Draft Express and career total rebound rate for those players that have played at least 50 games in the NBA. There were 241 players in the study.

The correlation between max vertical height and total rebound rate of this sample was .589 which is widely accepted as a moderately strong relationship.  Let’s take a look at it in graphical form.

The best rebounder of this group was Kevin Love who has a 21.2 pct TRR. With a 11’9″ (141 in.) max vertical height, Love’s reach isn’t off the charts for someone who is 6’10″ but he has a fantastic knack for collecting the live ball.  For comparison, Nick Young has the same max vertical height and has a rebound percentage of 4.9 pct.

The most disappointing rebounder is Rudy Gay who has a 9.2 pct TRR and can reach over two feet about the rim.  His rebound rate was 6.9 pct lower than what we’d expect given his “freakish length.”

The most impressive rebounder is Reggie Evans who out-rebounded his expected TRR by 12.1 pct.  At 6’9″, Evans reached 137 inches with his max vert height but posted a whopping 20.7 pct TRR.

The correlation between the two variables appears to be pretty strong. But can we make it better? Is there something that predicts rebounding better than the tallest point they can personally reach?

What about regular ol’ head-to-toe height?

Turns out that player height has a stronger relationship with rebounding than the previous matchup.  Specifically, the correlation was .757 which is commonly known as a Harangody-ly strong relationship.  Compare the two distributions. It’s quite apparent that the player height is more compact, less scattered than the max vert height.

So does this mean that we shouldn’t give two Rik Smits about player verticals and length? Yes and no.  Just because Rudy Gay can reach higher than every other player doesn’t mean he can do it in the middle of the paint.  He would need to have plenty of room and run full speed to get to that point.   That only happens on breakaways which rarely happens.  Furthermore, Gay isn’t positioned in the paint because he’s usually guarding a more perimeter-oriented player on the wing.  Ultimately, there’s a lot more to rebounding than how high a player can get; you need to get good positioning, box out, sabotage your opponent’s ability to rise, time your jump, jump instantly, and have the instincts to predict where the ball will end up.  Just to name a few.

Max vert height is sexy but it’s not practical.

Moreover, max vert height can provide benefits elsewhere on the court.  Getting a shot off cleanly and blocking shots — not to mention goaltending– can be boosted by a higher vertical and length.  But we can get into those at a different time.  Also in the future, we can look at confounding variables in this study that might hide some real effects.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

Why didn't you control for factors such as weight, position, etc.

What about standing vertical? That way, you don't have to worry about them having a running start.

Sounds like a job for an interaction variable: Max Vertical Height X Height In Inches. Tall guys might be able to see plays in action and know better/faster where to be for possible rebounds. And maybe even thrown vertical leap into the mix, but a seven footer with no vertical will still be able to block out leapers.

Thank you for the analysis, but none of this seems to be too surprising... Rebounds usually occur at a given height (call it 9 feet). For obvious reasons, it takes longer for a shorter player to get up to 9 feet than it takes a taller player, so the max vertical height is not incredibly consequential (how many rebounds occur 1.5-2 feet above the basket?).

Max vertical height also probably has a strong correlation with general athletic ability and leg strength, which could be more important factors in determining rebounding ability. So this might just be an example of correlation (due to the correlation with athleticism and leg strength) rather than causation.

Lastly, I agree with DSMok1. With Bilas once again going crazy about wingspans last night, it made me wonder if standing reach or height is a better determinant of rebounding ability (and general NBA success). It would also be interesting to see what would happen if you controlled for standing reach to see how much max vertical height would make a difference with rebounding success.

Thanks again for the post,
KRand

Agreed- max standing reach was what i thought this should have been about.

No standing reach? If length is superior to height then wouldn't it make more sense to take vertical jump out of the equation?

I would also be interested to see a correlation with weight. Big bodies can block out and sabotage their opponent’s ability to rise.

What's the correlation for pure standing reach? I'd think that's actually the best...