Bulls get the #1 pick! 2008 NBA Draft Discussion

[RynoRules]

I think scouting is more important in pro hoops than in any other sport (though pro football might be close). All of these guys play at different levels of competition with mitigating factors such as overall team talent and the system(s) they play in. If not for scouting, there would be no Yao, no Tony Parker, no Dirk, etc.

[Magnetic Curses]

I think scouting is more important in pro hoops than in any other sport (though pro football might be close). All of these guys play at different levels of competition with mitigating factors such as overall team talent and the system(s) they play in. If not for scouting, there would be no Yao, no Tony Parker, no Dirk, etc.

 

true, but those are guys that couldn't see with your own eyes before the nba. beasley was on national tv all the time, and so was rose.

[Magnetic Curses]

what if rose is stephon marbury? supremely gifted and somewhat accomplished, but a relative stranger to playoff basketball.

[rawaction]

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

 

Also, people arguing either way that one is better than the other really doesn't have anything to base their opinion on. You can argue Beasley put up better stats in college, but he clearly had a lesser team around him. You can argue Beasley was the #1 recruit coming out of HS, but Rose was a close #3 (Eric Gordon in between) according to Rivals. You can argue that Rose won games and made his team better, but he only helped an already 33-4 team that lost in the Elite 8 and helped them go 38-2 and lose in the championship game. Beasley played in a tougher conference. Rose played more big games. Rose played the tougher competition in highschool.

 

There's really not much to argue on anyway that one player is clearly better than the other, or even that one player will be clearly better than the other. I think Rose's stock is helped a ton by the fact that the last couple years have seen Deron Williams and CP3 develop into the league's top PGs. Beasley's is probably down a bit because of all the talent at the PF/SF positions and the fact there haven't been any lottery picks in the last few years to become stars.

[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.

Edited May 26, 2008 by Stannis

[Exile on Waveland]

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's there that's not to like--or a reason to be praying for rose.

 

Not only that, but rebounding is one of the most, if not the most, transferable statistic to the pro game.

[hawkeyecub]

what if rose is stephon marbury? supremely gifted and somewhat accomplished, but a relative stranger to playoff basketball.

 

Marbury is a stranger to playoff basketball because he's a complete idiot and doesn't know how to listen to coaching or make his teammates better.

I don't see any of that in Rose. I think he's also more physically gifted.

 

I would take Rose but at the same time I think Beasley is getting unfairly blasted by a lot of people. I also think college stats play a small role in the evaluation of these prospects.

[Magnetic Curses]

what if rose is stephon marbury? supremely gifted and somewhat accomplished, but a relative stranger to playoff basketball.

 

Marbury is a stranger to playoff basketball because he's a complete idiot and doesn't know how to listen to coaching or make his teammates better.

I don't see any of that in Rose. I think he's also more physically gifted.

 

i think they're just about equal in terms of athleticism. anyone remember seeing marbury's trampoline dunk in college? i swear that's the highest i've seen anyone jump, ever.

[Jehrico]

How about this trade scenario: Bulls send Hinrich, Gordon and the 1st pick to the Heat for Wade, the second pick, and salary filler.

 

If it's true that Miami wants Rose and will trade the second pick if they can't get him, then it's a sign that they're really concerned about their guard play. If they can get Rose and Hinrich, then they upgrade at PG with Hinrich who can run the team while they're developing Rose and while Rose is getting used to the league, without the injury risk. Gordon can replace most of Wade's scoring. The Bulls get a game-changing PG and their inside scoring force they've been looking for. They are assuming risk based on Wade's injury history. This would mean that we have to keep Duhon, which may not be that easy after last year. Thabo would be the main backup PG, unless Hughes can do it (I don't know how good of an option he would be as b/u PG considering his decline the last couple of years). If Wade's injury problems persist, then Hughes would have to step up as the SG then.

[Jehrico]

what if rose is stephon marbury? supremely gifted and somewhat accomplished, but a relative stranger to playoff basketball.

 

Marbury is a stranger to playoff basketball because he's a complete idiot and doesn't know how to listen to coaching or make his teammates better.

I don't see any of that in Rose. I think he's also more physically gifted.

 

i think they're just about equal in terms of athleticism. anyone remember seeing marbury's trampoline dunk in college? i swear that's the highest i've seen anyone jump, ever.

Agreed. Marbury compares with anyone in the league in terms of athleticism and ability. If he had a brain instead of an oversized ego, he might be on track to be one of the 50 greatest players of all time in the NBA. Rose is pretty comparable in terms of ability. Let's hope he's smarter than Marbury ever proved to be.

[Vanilla Ice]

What about this for the stats people?

 

Adam Morrison/J.J. Redick vs. Brandon Roy/Ronnie Brewer?

[BDWeav71]

How about this trade scenario: Bulls send Hinrich, Gordon and the 1st pick to the Heat for Wade, the second pick, and salary filler.

 

If it's true that Miami wants Rose and will trade the second pick if they can't get him, then it's a sign that they're really concerned about their guard play. If they can get Rose and Hinrich, then they upgrade at PG with Hinrich who can run the team while they're developing Rose and while Rose is getting used to the league, without the injury risk. Gordon can replace most of Wade's scoring. The Bulls get a game-changing PG and their inside scoring force they've been looking for. They are assuming risk based on Wade's injury history. This would mean that we have to keep Duhon, which may not be that easy after last year. Thabo would be the main backup PG, unless Hughes can do it (I don't know how good of an option he would be as b/u PG considering his decline the last couple of years). If Wade's injury problems persist, then Hughes would have to step up as the SG then.

 

 

Lets get this through our heads. Miami is not going to trade DWade.

[Magnetic Curses]

if we get wade, i don't think we'll be able to get the pick. they'll want more than that if we get their pick.

 

although the prospect of picking up Gordon AND Beasley would be very intriguing for them. we could probably just send salary filler, which would have to include hinrich.

[Guest]

Why trade for Wade? The Bulls will just sign him next offseason and have an all-Chicago-born backcourt.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

Wade to Chicago is a pipe dream. Rein$dorf will not pay the luxury tax.

[imb]

Wade and Rose would be a dominant backcourt for the 50 games a year Wade is on the court.

[GoCubsGo1679625768]

I think I might take 50 games of Wade over 82 games of whatever crap we currently have @ SG.

[rawaction]

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.

[nick23]

Stats don't always tell the whole story. I know people fall in love with the "numbers" and all, I will give Beasley props for his frosh season. All the stats says is that is "on the court" wise, Beasley had a better individual season then Rose. Nothing more/nothing less. I mean Glenn Robinson had better numbers then Jason Kidd, but who had a better NBA career? Glenn was a good NBA player, Kidd is a HOF. (Pac 10 .v. Big 10 debate in basketball here) SAR had better college numbers then Ray Allen. Who would you rather have? I know that this is an apples .v. oranges debate, comparing the Beasley/Rose to the Robinson/Kidd and SAR/Allen, but to simple truth is...college stats don't necessarily mean anything about who was a better player.

Throwing college stats in this debate on who is a better player (or a better fit) is like saying to W/L record is the end all measurement to a pitchers' worth to a team. People think I don't want Beasley (and if Beasley was a legit 6'10, he's a no-brainer), but I believe---if you look beyond the stats---Rose was a better player. Beasley look good on the ESPN highlights, but Rose made his team so much better then Beasley.

 

and i don't see any real, substantial, convincing evidence to support your case. all that's being said is that rose is the better player. well, why is rose the better player?

 

beasley scored over 26 ppg in 31 mpg. that's seriously impressive and shows me that he can put th eball in the hole. his rebounds show me that he was a dominant post presence and watching him play shows me that he was both physically superior to everyone in college basketball and a good perimeter player.

 

there are not many players with his skillset.

Rose was playing with 4 guys who have entered the draft this year. That is a big reason you can't just look at stats and tell who's better. If Rose would have needed to avg 26.0 a game for the team to win, he could have.

[Soul]

I didn't witness much of Beasley playing so I'll have to defer to those who know. I'm sure he's a great player based on what people say.

 

I do wonder about the PG situation though, Hinrich's not close to what we would need to be a great team, everyone has to realize that now. You can argue we need a scoring threat inside, but how much of that would be provided by Beasley at the NBA level by just being Beasley, and how much of that might be provided by having an outstanding PG running the offense with what we currently have, or after a package deal to pull someone in?

 

You could go crazy thinking about all the possibilities. So, I'm not going to. I'm just going to sit back and see what happens. It's a good position to be in. At least we won't be watching in horror as Miami picks Wade just ahead of us like they did when we had to settle on Hinrich.

[Guest]

Frank Burlison | Scout.com[/url]"]*Most everyone thinks the Chicago Bulls’ choice of Michael Beasley or Derrick Rose as the No. 1 overall pick on June 26 will be one that goes right down to the wire for the franchise’s decision makers.

 

Some wonder how much the tale of the tape in Orlando this week, in regards to how tall Beasley is “officially” measured, will impact the Bulls’ thinking.

 

Beasley was listed at 6-foot-10 on the Kansas State roster and by many media sources but some scouts believe he could stand closer to 6-7 plus than 6-10. I’ve listed him at 6-9 but wouldn’t be surprised if he measures at 6-8 (without shoes) this week.

 

The bottom line, though, is – regardless of how tall he really is – he’s going to be a very productive scorer and rebounder in the NBA for a long time to come, barring the unforeseen.

[Exile on Waveland]

Beasley has never looked 6'10" to me; more like somewhere between 6'7" and 6'8".

[gflore34]

Anyone else think Paxson' going to find a way to screw this one up? He'll either trade the pick away or draft Beasley or someone else over Rose?

[Soul]

Anyone else think Paxson' going to find a way to screw this one up? He'll either trade the pick away or draft Beasley or someone else over Rose?

 

He's not trading that pick. If he does he'll never make it home, there will be millions of fans out to burn him at the stake. I think he realizes this is his one, best chance to change the fortunes of this team for the next 10+ years.

 

I'm almost certain he's picking Rose. He just wants to do his due diligence on Beasley. I've been wrong before, but that's how I see it.

[rawaction]

I think Beasley's a legit 6'9". But if he does measure shorter, that makes the Bulls decision a lot easier. He's probably easily a better player than Deng, but if he's 6'8" or shorter, he's not a 4, which should make him pretty redundant on a team with Deng, Nocioni, Thabo, and Thomas.