I feel like if we knew every sport that every one of these guys played we'd realize that there are a lot of guys who played another sport. I actually think cross training is great and does help. I'd recommend it for all youth athletes and I've done some reading on this.....but it's not a detail that changes what I'm seeing. Those guys you mentioned were highly skilled, and I'm sure playing other sports helped with that. But what does that say about a guy who had that same development and isn't so skilled? Is that good or bad? I think you could go either way on that and for me it's just not so significant. If Black said he is a good passer because of another sport I'd believe him.....but saying he will be a better shooter because he had that previous cross training.....I'm not digging into that too much.
Like I said, it wouldn't change a thing for me if I knew Cason played 5 sports. I see him on the court and how hard he plays, that's what enough for me. Same goes for Black. It does not tip the scales knowing that he now played 4 sports when I only knew he played 2. I'm going to judge their competitiveness on the basis of how hard I see them compete on the court. Same goes for their jump shot or any other skill. I'm gonna look at his form, his percentages, the shots themselves....whether or not he played football isn't going to make a difference for me.
The same is true for the opposite case as well. You hear about Jamal Murray's dad programming him to be a basketball player from a young age. It worked for him, other things work for others. There's a million different origin stories of NBA players. These are good things to write articles and stories about but not something I put too much emphasis on in a draft evaluation. We all have our little tidbits that we gravitate too, however. I like guys with late growth spurts and probably care about it too much. At least it's not drafting Jabari Parker for the shape of his dome.
