Bulls get the #1 pick! 2008 NBA Draft Discussion

[Warpticon]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

[rawaction]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

[Warpticon]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

 

What?

[rawaction]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

 

What?

 

Going to have to elaborate.

[jersey cubs fan]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

 

What?

 

Going to have to elaborate.

 

Why?

[mul21]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

 

What?

 

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

[Derwood]

but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4

 

What?

 

He won't be an NBA power forward if he is 6'7" or 6'8".

 

What?

 

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Jordan was 6'6"....was he a SF? nope

Pippen was 6'9"....was he a PF? nope

 

there is no hard and fast rule about size per position

[Guest]

Scottie Pippen was 6-7 (some listings had him at 6-8 but realistically, he was 6-7) making him ideal height for a SF.

 

Yes there are players who don't fit the ideal height for their position and who succeed but you better be sure their other attributes (athleticism, body type, strength, speed, etc.) make up for a deficiency in height when you're taking that player first overall.

[Derwood]

Scottie Pippen was 6-7 (some listings had him at 6-8 but realistically, he was 6-7) making him ideal height for a SF.

 

Yes there are players who don't fit the ideal height for their position and who succeed but you better be sure their other attributes (athleticism, body type, strength, speed, etc.) make up for a deficiency in height when you're taking that player first overall.

 

ok, but tons of other examples of size =/= position (Magic Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Ben Wallace, etc.)

[rawaction]

Scottie Pippen was 6-7 (some listings had him at 6-8 but realistically, he was 6-7) making him ideal height for a SF.

 

Yes there are players who don't fit the ideal height for their position and who succeed but you better be sure their other attributes (athleticism, body type, strength, speed, etc.) make up for a deficiency in height when you're taking that player first overall.

 

ok, but tons of other examples of size =/= position (Magic Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Ben Wallace, etc.)

 

I don't understand. PGs height matter less than any other position. The key is ball handling, that's why Magic at 6'9" was able to play it. Rodman and Wallace had the athleticism and size to make up for their lack of height, but both had a narrowly focused game.

 

Beasley is a potential #1 pick because of his ability to do several things, the most of which being able to score inside and outside. If he's 2 inches shorter than most PFs in the league, then his ability to score on the inside will be severely hampered.

[Guest]

Scottie Pippen was 6-7 (some listings had him at 6-8 but realistically, he was 6-7) making him ideal height for a SF.

 

Yes there are players who don't fit the ideal height for their position and who succeed but you better be sure their other attributes (athleticism, body type, strength, speed, etc.) make up for a deficiency in height when you're taking that player first overall.

 

ok, but tons of other examples of size =/= position (Magic Johnson, Dennis Rodman, Ben Wallace, etc.)

 

Did you read my second paragraph?

[Tyrant]

he still managed to score a lot of points and shoot a high percentage while dominating the boards.

 

Right. This is why I don't think the "bad team" argument means anything. He scored 26 points a game, on 17 shots per game. That's very good for a big man.

 

I'm still hoping for Rose, but I don't think people should be frothing mad if we wind up with Beasley. I think Pax usually does a pretty decent job in the draft, so I trust him here.

[mul21]

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Jordan was 6'6"....was he a SF? nope

Pippen was 6'9"....was he a PF? nope

 

there is no hard and fast rule about size per position

 

That's the opposite of what I was saying. Those guys were big for the position they played. Beasley is possibly undersized for the position he's slated to play. Guys like Rodman and Brand get away with being a little short because they have great energy and aren't relied on for their offense or they have a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys that size. Beasley is an athletic guy with a much smaller build than Brand but great mobility.

 

My only point was that he may not have the big body to score in the post that he's advertised to be, which is a concern for me when he may be the top pick in the draft.

 

Therefore, I like picking Rose at the top of the draft better.

[Guest]

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Jordan was 6'6"....was he a SF? nope

Pippen was 6'9"....was he a PF? nope

 

there is no hard and fast rule about size per position

 

That's the opposite of what I was saying. Those guys were big for the position they played. Beasley is possibly undersized for the position he's slated to play. Guys like Rodman and Brand get away with being a little short because they have great energy and aren't relied on for their offense or they have a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys that size. Beasley is an athletic guy with a much smaller build than Brand but great mobility.

 

My only point was that he may not have the big body to score in the post that he's advertised to be, which is a concern for me when he may be the top pick in the draft.

 

Therefore, I like picking Rose at the top of the draft better.

 

Since when is Elton Brand not relied upon for his offense?

[imb]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

[Guest]

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Jordan was 6'6"....was he a SF? nope

Pippen was 6'9"....was he a PF? nope

 

there is no hard and fast rule about size per position

 

That's the opposite of what I was saying. Those guys were big for the position they played. Beasley is possibly undersized for the position he's slated to play. Guys like Rodman and Brand get away with being a little short because they have great energy and aren't relied on for their offense or they have a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys that size. Beasley is an athletic guy with a much smaller build than Brand but great mobility.

 

My only point was that he may not have the big body to score in the post that he's advertised to be, which is a concern for me when he may be the top pick in the draft.

 

Therefore, I like picking Rose at the top of the draft better.

 

Since when is Elton Brand not relied upon for his offense?

 

I believe he was referring to Rodamn not being relied on for offense and Brand having a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys his size.

 

And I most definitely agree, IMB!

[imb]

At 6'7" or 6'8", he won't be tall enough with his body type to be successful playing a true power forward spot in the NBA. Therefore, his value is diminished because he won't be an inside scoring force like he is being made out to be. If that's not clear enough, I don't know what to tell you.

 

Jordan was 6'6"....was he a SF? nope

Pippen was 6'9"....was he a PF? nope

 

there is no hard and fast rule about size per position

 

That's the opposite of what I was saying. Those guys were big for the position they played. Beasley is possibly undersized for the position he's slated to play. Guys like Rodman and Brand get away with being a little short because they have great energy and aren't relied on for their offense or they have a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys that size. Beasley is an athletic guy with a much smaller build than Brand but great mobility.

 

My only point was that he may not have the big body to score in the post that he's advertised to be, which is a concern for me when he may be the top pick in the draft.

 

Therefore, I like picking Rose at the top of the draft better.

 

Since when is Elton Brand not relied upon for his offense?

 

I believe he was referring to Rodamn not being relied on for offense and Brand having a relatively big body with better quickness than most guys his size.

 

And I most definitely agree, IMB!

 

No matter who they get, they win. They went from Darrell Arthur to Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley. That's a franchise saver.

[CuseCubFan69]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

 

 

I agree if the superstar PG can hit open jump shots. A SSPG is more like a stock and a SSPF is more like a bond to me, the PF can get you 17-21/8-11 but the PG could be the missing piece that makes it all work or shoot too much and screw up the system.

[rawaction]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

 

 

I agree if the superstar PG can hit open jump shots. A SSPG is more like a stock and a SSPF is more like a bond to me, the PF can get you 17-21/8-11 but the PG could be the missing piece that makes it all work or shoot too much and screw up the system.

 

The Bulls don't have a guy that can create his own shots, other than Gordon, though his size hampers him often times. Rose can create his own and can create shots for his teammates, especially slashers like Deng, Noah, Tyrus. Rose has the best court vision I may have ever seen. I don't think there's physically anything Beasley CAN'T do on the court. But he won't make his teammates better.

[rawaction]

 

No matter who they get, they win. They went from Darrell Arthur to Derrick Rose or Michael Beasley. That's a franchise saver.

 

Agreed. I want Rose, but I won't complain over getting a bigger Carmelo Anthony over a smaller D Wade.

[CuseCubFan69]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

 

 

I agree if the superstar PG can hit open jump shots. A SSPG is more like a stock and a SSPF is more like a bond to me, the PF can get you 17-21/8-11 but the PG could be the missing piece that makes it all work or shoot too much and screw up the system.

 

The Bulls don't have a guy that can create his own shots, other than Gordon, though his size hampers him often times. Rose can create his own and can create shots for his teammates, especially slashers like Deng, Noah, Tyrus. Rose has the best court vision I may have ever seen. I don't think there's physically anything Beasley CAN'T do on the court. But he won't make his teammates better.

 

He does when he rebounds their missed shots and puts them in the basket! Is he really just 6'7"?

 

Creating is good if you have shooters to kick out to. If not, they pack it in and force the shots to fall.

[rawaction]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

 

 

I agree if the superstar PG can hit open jump shots. A SSPG is more like a stock and a SSPF is more like a bond to me, the PF can get you 17-21/8-11 but the PG could be the missing piece that makes it all work or shoot too much and screw up the system.

 

The Bulls don't have a guy that can create his own shots, other than Gordon, though his size hampers him often times. Rose can create his own and can create shots for his teammates, especially slashers like Deng, Noah, Tyrus. Rose has the best court vision I may have ever seen. I don't think there's physically anything Beasley CAN'T do on the court. But he won't make his teammates better.

 

He does when he rebounds their missed shots and puts them in the basket! Is he really just 6'7"?

 

Creating is good if you have shooters to kick out to. If not, they pack it in and force the shots to fall.

 

He doesn't keep them from missing those shots in the first place though. And his put backs makes the team and his stats better. And I refuse to believe Beasley is 6'7". I think he's 6'9", but probably only w/ shoes.

 

Creating a shot doesn't just mean kicking out for a jumper. It also means getting in the paint and getting easy baskets for your inside players, or drawing the defense leaving the offensive boards open. Joey Dorsey averaged nearly 10 ppg at Memphis this year, with absolutely 0 offensive talent. Tyson Chandler had a great year, with slightly more offensive ability than Dorsey.

[CuseCubFan69]

all this hemming and hawing aside, I think you've got to take the potential superstar PG over the potential superstar PF.

 

 

I agree if the superstar PG can hit open jump shots. A SSPG is more like a stock and a SSPF is more like a bond to me, the PF can get you 17-21/8-11 but the PG could be the missing piece that makes it all work or shoot too much and screw up the system.

 

The Bulls don't have a guy that can create his own shots, other than Gordon, though his size hampers him often times. Rose can create his own and can create shots for his teammates, especially slashers like Deng, Noah, Tyrus. Rose has the best court vision I may have ever seen. I don't think there's physically anything Beasley CAN'T do on the court. But he won't make his teammates better.

 

He does when he rebounds their missed shots and puts them in the basket! Is he really just 6'7"?

 

Creating is good if you have shooters to kick out to. If not, they pack it in and force the shots to fall.

 

He doesn't keep them from missing those shots in the first place though. And his put backs makes the team and his stats better. And I refuse to believe Beasley is 6'7". I think he's 6'9", but probably only w/ shoes.

 

Creating a shot doesn't just mean kicking out for a jumper. It also means getting in the paint and getting easy baskets for your inside players, or drawing the defense leaving the offensive boards open. Joey Dorsey averaged nearly 10 ppg at Memphis this year, with absolutely 0 offensive talent. Tyson Chandler had a great year, with slightly more offensive ability than Dorsey.

 

When the game turns half court, you need a PG that can shoot. This is why the good point guards make their teammates better like Paul and Nash because they can shoot as well. I haven't seen Rose enough to see him shoot but if he can hit the open J, he'll be fine. Magic had a goofy set shot but he could hit it if left open. Kidd....e-gads his shot is nasty.

[Magnetic Curses]

Anyone that thinks stats come even close to determining the better player.....do you think Tyler Hansbrough is a better pro than Derrick Rose?

 

i don't know. who's the better pro? michael beasley or drew neitzel?

 

neither are pros yet and they don't play the same position. but i'd wager that there are far more examples of successful, high major players that put up great stats in college and succeed in the nba than there are examples of players who put up good stats and succeed.

 

furthermore, the lesser team argument doesn't hold water. beasley shot a high percentage, meaning he wasn't just running down the lane and throwing shots up because his teammates sucked, nor was he shooting every time down the court due to a lack of a better alternative.

 

i don't see how the rebounds are really a function of his team being bad, either. his team wasn't a good shooting team, but it wasn't incredibly bad, at least not enough to be able to point to team shooting percentage and say "there are your rebounds".

 

lastly, as i've said before, beasley got double and triple-teamed all year because his team was bad. he still managed to score a lot of points and shoot a high percentage while dominating the boards. i don't really know what there's not to like--or a reason to be praying for rose.

 

Did you read the part of the post you didn't quote? I clearly said, I don't know how anyone can say one of Beasley/Rose is better than the other.

 

i was just addressing the knocks on beasley in your post, i never said that you think rose is the better player.

[Soul]

When the game turns half court, you need a PG that can shoot. This is why the good point guards make their teammates better like Paul and Nash because they can shoot as well. I haven't seen Rose enough to see him shoot but if he can hit the open J, he'll be fine. Magic had a goofy set shot but he could hit it if left open. Kidd....e-gads his shot is nasty.

 

Not arguing with you, but how would you explain that Kidd is likely going to the hall of fame then? Just an exception to the rule? Or do you just think he's overrated?