From: davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu (Stimpson J. Cat)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro
Subject: Shawn Kemp (was:Re: Doug Christie)
Date: 8 Jan 1993 18:59:20 -0800
Organization: Seattle University
NNTP-Posting-Host: sumax.seattleu.edu

In article <1993Jan7.071706.17141@muddcs.claremont.edu> byau@jarthur.claremont.edu (Ben Yau) writes:
>In article <1993Jan7.044907.24280@leland.Stanford.EDU> terry@garfield.Stanford.EDU (Terry Wong) writes:
>>
>>This is a consideration, because Seattle is not very deep in terms of big men.
>>Other than Kemp, Cage, and Benjamin, they don't have any physical players.
>>Benjamin was really a non-factor against Golden State since he played
>>less than 5 minutes.
>>
>>					terry@garfield.Stanford.EDU
>
>the interesting thing about Kemp is that I don't think he is taht
>physical a player.  Sophmore year when I saw him for the first time
>(i mean his sophomore year), i was surprised because it looked like 
>he shrank!! last year (his third year), he looked like he had regained 
>some of the width of his shoulders.
>
>I think Cage and Benjamin are the most phyuiscal.  I don't think Kemp
>is that phyiscal.  He seems to be physical when he can taste the dunk.
>Otherwise, He'll try to do spin moves and take fade-away jumpers and
>hooks. Although a lot of big men do this, they also work with their
>strength to get steps closer to the basket.  I do not see Kemp diong
>this to much unless he is already really close to the basket where 
>he wouldn't really need to get physical to make the next step
>to make the dunk.
>
>If you read ..lesee.. i think it is INSIDE SPORTS magazine, which
>btw, has a really good article about the NBA's good ol days and why
>today's NBA is no match at all, anyway, if you read INSIDE SPORTS
>there is an article where Horace Grant rates to forwards in the NBA.
>First, he did not list L.Johnson which surprised me.  And he listed
>Kemp at around #11 i think (after Derrick Coleman , though, I 
>remember that..  ).. anyway, Grant said that Kemp has a bright future,
>but needs more experience, explaining that it is probably due to Kemp
>not playing college ball.
>
>He is also says that Kemp is not a very physical player so it is easy
>to guard Kemp.
>
>When I watch him play , (kemp) I have to agree.  He is not as physical
>as I thought he would be for his size..
>
>

	I also agree that Kemp is not physical, in that he is not a muscular
powerhouse. Karl Malone and Barkley are physical. They can back you down and
push you around, and Kemp doesn't do that. In the playoffs, it was clear
Karl Malone was much stronger physically than Kemp.

	Instead, Kemp is *explosive*.  He is very explosive, in quickness and
jumping, but is strong enough that he has power to complement it so he is not
a finesse player (he is too raw to be such a player even if he wanted to be,
anyway.) He can't throw you out of the way, but he can jump over you or go
around you, and he's strong enough that you can't *keep* him from jumping
over you and going around you. Remember, last season Kemp averaged 10
rebounds a game in only 28 minutes per game. This season, I am a little
disappointed in his offense  and rebounding, he is getting more minutes but
his rebounds have stayed at 10 per game, and his FG% should be over 50%, but
is only around the 47% mark. I think Kemp is in a offensive slump, worsened
by injuries. He has vastly expanded his offensive repertoire, and the shots
fell early in the season making him look like he had arrived, but lately the
shots just seem to be a bit off, not quite there- were it not for the 
ever-present dunks, he'd be around the low 40's in percentage. I do question
a bit Kemp's durability, he's not been healthy for too many games in his
young career.

	Kemp is stronger now, though. He is 260 pounds, and looks noticeably
bigger in the legs and upper body. He was strong enough to defend Hakeem
Olajuwon man-for-man in the post, so it is probably safe to say he'll be harder
for Karl Malone to toss around this season. I thought for sure he would be
a unquestioned All-Star, but his slump perhaps makes him marginal now, I'd
have to see who he was up against to decide. If he finds his shot soon, though,
he could move right back up.

	He has a lot of development to do, but the "vast potential" people
talk about is not overrated. College would have made him a much better
player by now - guys like Derrick Coleman and Larry Johnson show the value of
college as far as developing the subtleties of one's game. You can see the
essence of Kemp in one series against Golden State- if I recall rightly,
Seattle was fast breaking, and Kemp made a great behind the back (between the
legs? I didn't have that great a view) dribble move, whatever it was, it was
a really fancy ball-handling trick you wouldn't expect out of a 6'10" big guy, 
and it showed his potential. Alas, he had to do it because he was one-on-three
against three Warriors, and only a Warrior foul bailed him out. The potential,
and his lack of polish, all on one play. That's where Kemp is right now.




				David L. Yee
			email to:davidy@sumax.seattleu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.pro