Completely disagree with this. As someone who has a fair amount of experience with hooping and running, plus as someone who has legitimate speed (not as much now, but I broke 21 over 200 on my "youth"), the energy systems and running involved in basketball (even serious full court) compared to ANY kind of serious track running (even a 100) are pretty much COMPLETELY different. If you're training to be a serious baller, moving over to the track to run a respecable 400, let alone high level (even for size) just ISN'T going to happen. That's especially true for someone of Zions size. 35/40 inch verts have NOTHING to do with reaching and maintaining velocity on a track in any real sense. MAYBE it translates to block/acceleration abolity.....but that isn't an absolute, direct, certainty either.
Smaller guys might be able to pull it off, like a Curry or something...but even that might be iffy. They'd be DISASTERS after the 250 mark, even at peak basketball fitness. UNLESS they are actually doing some track training in TANDEM with their hoops work. Which NBA guys (or any other strictly basketball guys) would NOT be doing. 400m/track training has virtually no carryover to court success....unless, of course, you're 30/40 lbs overweight.
Unless you played D1 basketball, you have no experience playing basketball at that level. "Serious full court" isn't remotely the same as the physical demands required to play at that level.
Considering that I've blown by DI level hoopers on the basketball court, reliant nearly entirely on my raw speed than basketball skill, and they were blown AWAY by what that level of speed actually looked and felt like (as opposed to "basketball speed and quickness"), I'm pretty sure basketball specific people just don't have a real understanding of what track speed type stuff really entails. Perhaps in the same way that YOU think that I can't understand the physical demands of high level basketball.
However, seeing as defending in basketball requires lateral forces and movement COMPLETELY unrelated to flat sprints/track movement, and involves spaces covering anywhere from drives inside and around the three point line to base line to base line efforts (more rare), which even for a full court sprint doesn't even cover 30 meters.
30 meters rarely qualifies even as a full drive phase for any short sprinter worth his salt, so it would seem to me that no matter HOW "fit" the most elite of elite hoopers are for their sport, believing they even have a concept for what track fitness even IS is like thinking marathoners can break 12 over 100 meters off their marathon training.
Look up that debate on letsrun for more reference on that comparison. Unless Curry does dedicated track work in his off season, or even in season....then meet me at the track or court and we can settle our discussions there.
Unless you played D1 basketball, you have no experience playing basketball at that level. "Serious full court" isn't remotely the same as the physical demands required to play at that level.
Considering that I've blown by DI level hoopers on the basketball court, reliant nearly entirely on my raw speed than basketball skill, and they were blown AWAY by what that level of speed actually looked and felt like (as opposed to "basketball speed and quickness"), I'm pretty sure basketball specific people just don't have a real understanding of what track speed type stuff really entails. Perhaps in the same way that YOU think that I can't understand the physical demands of high level basketball.
However, seeing as defending in basketball requires lateral forces and movement COMPLETELY unrelated to flat sprints/track movement, and involves spaces covering anywhere from drives inside and around the three point line to base line to base line efforts (more rare), which even for a full court sprint doesn't even cover 30 meters.
30 meters rarely qualifies even as a full drive phase for any short sprinter worth his salt, so it would seem to me that no matter HOW "fit" the most elite of elite hoopers are for their sport, believing they even have a concept for what track fitness even IS is like thinking marathoners can break 12 over 100 meters off their marathon training.
Look up that debate on letsrun for more reference on that comparison. Unless Curry does dedicated track work in his off season, or even in season....then meet me at the track or court and we can settle our discussions there.
I mean, what's your point? Yes, a pro basketball player isn't "track conditioned." Some of them, the real freaks, might be able to do a 49 for 400m, however, that's not what we're talking about about here. Are you arguing that a 60s quarter is out of reach of a guy like this? If so, that's just delusional.
It's 60s. I ran faster than that when I was like 13, off of, get this, football training.
Considering that I've blown by DI level hoopers on the basketball court, reliant nearly entirely on my raw speed than basketball skill, and they were blown AWAY by what that level of speed actually looked and felt like (as opposed to "basketball speed and quickness"), I'm pretty sure basketball specific people just don't have a real understanding of what track speed type stuff really entails. Perhaps in the same way that YOU think that I can't understand the physical demands of high level basketball.
However, seeing as defending in basketball requires lateral forces and movement COMPLETELY unrelated to flat sprints/track movement, and involves spaces covering anywhere from drives inside and around the three point line to base line to base line efforts (more rare), which even for a full court sprint doesn't even cover 30 meters.
30 meters rarely qualifies even as a full drive phase for any short sprinter worth his salt, so it would seem to me that no matter HOW "fit" the most elite of elite hoopers are for their sport, believing they even have a concept for what track fitness even IS is like thinking marathoners can break 12 over 100 meters off their marathon training.
Look up that debate on letsrun for more reference on that comparison. Unless Curry does dedicated track work in his off season, or even in season....then meet me at the track or court and we can settle our discussions there.
I mean, what's your point? Yes, a pro basketball player isn't "track conditioned." Some of them, the real freaks, might be able to do a 49 for 400m, however, that's not what we're talking about about here. Are you arguing that a 60s quarter is out of reach of a guy like this? If so, that's just delusional.
It's 60s. I ran faster than that when I was like 13, off of, get this, football training.
For 6'6 260/270ish or-whatever-he-is-now? Yeah, I think I'm feeling that way about it. At least footballs "ideal" running distance is 40 yards, straight line, which you run THROUGH the line of. Base line to base line is 28ish meters, and ideally you don't want to run THROUGH the end baseline at top speed, in a basketball sense. So even football, which doesn't translate super easy to track beyond, like, 60 meters even for sprinters, is more in tune than basketball for track running.
I ran faster than 60 when I was 11. So. What's YOUR point? You're correct, 60 isn't fast....to track people. But at that 250ish mark on a 400, even a person who is capable of 60 isn't going to get 60 if their life revolves around other things that essentially DETRAIN you for something like 400 meters. When you add the additional nuance of what getting a 6'6/260ish body around the track? Yes, my stance would be it would take serious track training to get him there.
Maybe he DID do it cause of the weight loss/fitness needs? Still seems pretty unlikely to me. I'd wager if someone recorded him sub 60, it was essentially a "flying" 385 or something.
"Invisible finish line".....OK, down voters, let me clarify. He did NOT run a sub 60. Gimme a break.
Not only do you severely overestimate the athleticism needed to run a 60 second quarter, you fail to comprehend figurative language. Impressive!
Not athleticism, but FITNESS and sport specific fitness. FIGURE out those concepts and their distinguishing characteristics and then go ahead and get back to me.
Not only do you severely overestimate the athleticism needed to run a 60 second quarter, you fail to comprehend figurative language. Impressive!
Not athleticism, but FITNESS and sport specific fitness. FIGURE out those concepts and their distinguishing characteristics and then go ahead and get back to me.
You really are delusional. Now of course there are the ridiculous people on here that suggest NBA players could be running 4:20 miles or faster, but a 60 second 400m? That's not even a sprint.
So even football, which doesn't translate super easy to track beyond, like, 60 meters even for sprinters, is more in tune than basketball for track running.
LOL, say goodbye to whatever credibility you might have had.
So even football, which doesn't translate super easy to track beyond, like, 60 meters even for sprinters, is more in tune than basketball for track running.
LOL, say goodbye to whatever credibility you might have had.
Sure. Just like I said goodbye in the final 40 meters of the 100 to all the football guys who also tried to run track.
I'm sorry but anybody who doesn't believe he can run sub 60 quarters just doesn't know what its like to be athletic.
It's painfully clear some of you have never played a sport besides XC in your life.
I damn near broke 50 off of nothing but football training and I was not the fastest on the team.
"what it's ike to be athletic".....were you the fastest 400 guy on your football team? Maybe that's why you were the "fastest" 40 guy....cause you were inherently a 400 guy trying to make it as a football player. Hmm...soundslike you don't understand the nuance of the idea "athleticism".
In basketball, you're running up and down the court almost continuously for minutes at a time, and often doing up and back sprints of varying lengths for much more than a minute, so most basketball players in the NBA should be conditioned for this. Only his unusual athletic ability would allow Zion to do this at that weight, however.
Completely disagree with this. As someone who has a fair amount of experience with hooping and running, plus as someone who has legitimate speed (not as much now, but I broke 21 over 200 on my "youth"), the energy systems and running involved in basketball (even serious full court) compared to ANY kind of serious track running (even a 100) are pretty much COMPLETELY different. If you're training to be a serious baller, moving over to the track to run a respecable 400, let alone high level (even for size) just ISN'T going to happen. That's especially true for someone of Zions size. 35/40 inch verts have NOTHING to do with reaching and maintaining velocity on a track in any real sense. MAYBE it translates to block/acceleration abolity.....but that isn't an absolute, direct, certainty either.
Smaller guys might be able to pull it off, like a Curry or something...but even that might be iffy. They'd be DISASTERS after the 250 mark, even at peak basketball fitness. UNLESS they are actually doing some track training in TANDEM with their hoops work. Which NBA guys (or any other strictly basketball guys) would NOT be doing. 400m/track training has virtually no carryover to court success....unless, of course, you're 30/40 lbs overweight.
You ran and played basketball? And you are still this wrong???? WTF? I guess logic and reasoning are not your strong points.
Breaking 60 is nothing for a good Sprinter. Even a big one. Do you really want me to list all the top level 100 m guys who also ran world class 400s in the last few years?? The events translate very well to one another. Most basketball players are more than respectable sprinters. Many also do some endurance work and yes there is absolutely an aerobic component to playing basketball. Put alllll that together... and the large majority of NBA players [except the super tall_super gangly uncoordinated slow ones] can break 60. Easily.
Zion , *before he lost the weight* could dunk from the free-throw line. THAT my friend is explosive power. I'm Sure he can run a decent 100m. And from there to a 60 sec 400 would only take a smidgen of aerobic ability.
Few caveats... 1) this isn't FAT gun start I'm sure he gets a flying start (this makes some difference beyond just hand time) 2) This is probably just the last 400 and well faster than he could do if he had to repeat the pace 3) He's been training seriously for months on the track as part of his return to the court — it's pretty clear he didn't roll out of bed and run a sub-60 400.
Now, I don't get why people think this is BS. First of all the reporter, Howard Beck, is highly respected and not one to embellish. Second, people reading it have no idea of difference between a 60 or 70 second quarter. It isn't explored in the article either (they don't say he's running 4 minute mile pace etc.). So why would Zion and his people lie about it and deviously get a reporter to participate that lie? Odd. Wouldn't you say 50 seconds or something outlandish if you wanted to do that? Lastly, it's just not that crazy a time. Yeah, it's fast considering Zion is a massive human being, but he's a freak of an athlete and has hops and speed that we've never seen in an athlete of his size. If the guy's training hard, I'm not particularly shocked he could run sub-60.
Completely disagree with this. As someone who has a fair amount of experience with hooping and running, plus as someone who has legitimate speed (not as much now, but I broke 21 over 200 on my "youth"), the energy systems and running involved in basketball (even serious full court) compared to ANY kind of serious track running (even a 100) are pretty much COMPLETELY different. If you're training to be a serious baller, moving over to the track to run a respecable 400, let alone high level (even for size) just ISN'T going to happen. That's especially true for someone of Zions size. 35/40 inch verts have NOTHING to do with reaching and maintaining velocity on a track in any real sense. MAYBE it translates to block/acceleration abolity.....but that isn't an absolute, direct, certainty either.
Smaller guys might be able to pull it off, like a Curry or something...but even that might be iffy. They'd be DISASTERS after the 250 mark, even at peak basketball fitness. UNLESS they are actually doing some track training in TANDEM with their hoops work. Which NBA guys (or any other strictly basketball guys) would NOT be doing. 400m/track training has virtually no carryover to court success....unless, of course, you're 30/40 lbs overweight.
You ran and played basketball? And you are still this wrong???? WTF? I guess logic and reasoning are not your strong points.
Breaking 60 is nothing for a good Sprinter. Even a big one. Do you really want me to list all the top level 100 m guys who also ran world class 400s in the last few years?? The events translate very well to one another. Most basketball players are more than respectable sprinters. Many also do some endurance work and yes there is absolutely an aerobic component to playing basketball. Put alllll that together... and the large majority of NBA players [except the super tall_super gangly uncoordinated slow ones] can break 60. Easily.
Zion , *before he lost the weight* could dunk from the free-throw line. THAT my friend is explosive power. I'm Sure he can run a decent 100m. And from there to a 60 sec 400 would only take a smidgen of aerobic ability.
I'm giving you a thousand down votes.
Most basketball players are terrible sprinters. Hence "breaking 60 is nothing for a good sprinter" is a terrible argument.
Just about the only people who think hoopers are good sprinters are...hoopers. until they meet real runners, which they seldom do cause they spend all their time at the courts. When a runner (sprinter) comes by and shows them real speed, they get VERY confused. Usually pretty angry, too, if it results in it showing them up on the court. But every once in a while they get a kick out of it cause it blows their mind so much
