Official 2008-2009 NBA Thread

[Steve9347]

With that said, I do not understand the overreaction on your part.

That and the fact that the #1 pick will not be dealt regardless of what this team has done in the past.

 

The trade ideas the Knicks fans are coming up with on espn's message boards are priceless. That franchise REALLY wanted Rose.

[rangercal]

That and the fact that the #1 pick will not be dealt regardless of what this team has done in the past.

 

The trade ideas the Knicks fans are coming up with on espn's message boards are priceless. That franchise REALLY wanted Rose.

The Knicks are the Lime(dpbl) of the NBA. (you know what I'm talking about)

[lostfan]

rangercal, no you are not the only one that thinks it's not a good idea to end the Tyrus Thomas experiment. What's done is done, we wish we could have Aldridge but we can't, and TT is still very young.

[The Beast]

That and the fact that the #1 pick will not be dealt regardless of what this team has done in the past.

 

The trade ideas the Knicks fans are coming up with on espn's message boards are priceless. That franchise REALLY wanted Rose.

Then if they wanted Rose, let's pick him and not make the mistake of not selecting him.

[Chisoxfn]

Derrik Rose baby. I'd package Hinrich & Gordon for a big, resign Deng, and pretty much go as is. Or package Hughes and someone for a big.

 

I'm excited.

[Texsox]

#1 picks are nice and all, but MJ was available at #3.

[ZoomSlowik]

Just throwing my thoughts in here. Obviously both are supremely talented players and I'd be extremely happy with either of them, but as things stand right now I'd take Beasley. I think the Brand comparison is a bit off, he plays on the perimeter more than that though he can still bang inside. I'd say something more like Carmelo Anthony with a mean streak or Shawn Marion with offensive abilities. The guy is a stud and will be a serious matchup problem at the 4.

 

Things can change though, and if we can deal Kirk for an upgrade inside I wouldn't hesitate. You won't miss him at all with Rose, he has all the physical gifts to be a stud. I'd just really rather not see us depend on Tyrus, Noah and Gooden to hold down the interior again, that'll make it very hard to win in the playoffs (yes, I'm talking playoffs with one of those guys) unless Tyrus has that breakout season everyone keeps praying for that I still kinda doubt is coming since he has basically no offensive abilities. You gotta remember that Nash has Stoudemire, Williams has Boozer and Paul has West, none of our interior guys are anywhere near that good and they STILL can't seem to get over the hump. Elton Brand would be phenomenal, that'd give you a lot more talent inside on the offensive end and I don't think it's a stretch to say you could get him for Hinrich and one of Gooden/Nocioni/Tyrus.

[rangercal]

#1 picks are nice and all, but MJ was available at #3.

 

Trust me. This is not the year of the #3 Pick.

[Steve9347]

From NBADraft.net

 

Who's No. 1: Rose or Beasley?

 

After seeing the two play as rising seniors in Las Vegas in July of 2006, the talent was unmistakable. And despite considerable hype around O.J. Mayo, they leapfrogged him to 1 and 2 on the NBADraft.net 2008 mock draft.

 

Beasley has not only been the most dominant college basketball player in the country (averaging 26 and 12), but the most dominant freshman in recent memory. His numbers trump last season's player of the year Durant, and since early in the season, he's been considered the odds-on favorite to be the top pick this year. But a funny thing happened during the NCAA tournament, as folks got to see just how dominant and important Derrick Rose can be to a team, with Memphis coming a missed free throw from winning a national championship.

 

Speaking to NBA scouts, it appears to be a dead heat as to which of the two should be the first pick. Some still prefer Beasley, while others have swung to Rose. One thing is clear, there's a significant drop-off after the top two selections. Let's examine the pros and cons of both players.

 

Michael Beasley

 

Pros: Beasley has the potential to be a 25 and 10 guy at the next level. He can be absolutely dominant offensively as the game comes so effortlessly to him. His amazing body control and aggressiveness allows him to jump into the lane and spontaneously make plays around the rim. His touch is, in a word, special, and gives him the ability to effortlessly score in bunches. His versatility to play physical and score inside or on the perimeter gives him a ton of offensive potential.

 

Beasley's combination of agility and strength is extremely rare. He often rebounds missed shots way out of his position using his phenomenal body control and soft hands to tip the ball to himself. Beasley has a man's body at 18 years of age and seems to enjoy contact.

 

Forcing someone like him to play two years of college (a rule the NBA is considering for the future) would border on the ridiculous. His game is NBA-ready now, and he should have no trouble equaling what Durant did this year in Seattle, only with more efficiency.

 

Cons: Beasley came into Manhattan, Kan. with the reputation of a loose cannon. While he has been a model citizen since arriving on campus showing that he has matured, there are still greater character concerns with him than with Rose. For a player with such immense talent, why is it that he was not asked to come back to play his senior season at Oak Hill Academy?

 

Is he a player that cares more about statistics and individual accolades than winning? Beasley's decision to attend Kansas State over a team like North Carolina, UConn, or Kansas can be seen as a knock against him in the sense that he chose a team where he could display his individual talent instead of playing for a national championship.

 

The effortless nature of his game could actually turn into a negative. A number of scouts feel that Beasley could turn into another Derrick Coleman. And while that may not be such a terrible thing (DC averaged 20 and 10 for five seasons), Coleman is seen as a bit of a bust, given the amount of talent he possessed. He seemed to enjoy the NBA life over the competition and striving to be a champion. There is the fear that without proper work habits, Beasley will become just a talented jump shooter, not fully utilizing all of his physical talents.

 

Beasley's NBA position is also a bit of a question mark. Is he a 3 or a 4? It depends who you ask. While he has the strength to rebound against NBA power forwards and the range to play on the perimeter, he's still on the small side for a NBA PF at 6-9, 235 lbs and lacks the foot speed of most NBA small forwards. He has the talent to play whatever position he wants, but without a clear-cut position, it is a slight detriment. How big a problem this will be is questionable, but it's certainly worthy of consideration in the debate.

 

Derrick Rose

 

Pros: Playing the point, Rose will have the ball in his hands, and he has shown the rare ability to run a team and make his teammates better. His speed and athletic advantage allow him to dominate opponents on both ends of the floor. And while Beasley is a solid defender, Rose can absolutely lock down opposing point guards as he showed in the tourney against highly regarded Darren Collison and D.J. Augustin. As great as Rose has been at the college level, his game seems better suited to the pro game where more athletic teammates will be able to fully utilize all of his talents.

 

With the great success that Utah and New Orleans have found taking point guards high in the draft in Deron Williams and Chris Paul, the value of a game-changing point guard continues to rise. Rose has a chance to be every bit as good as these two, which is a big statement considering both players would rate in the top 10 in value among all NBA players.

 

One scout told me, "It's a no-brainer, he's a quicker Jason Kidd, but Rose can actually shoot it a little bit." Rose puts such tremendous pressure on opponents with his blinding speed and ability to push the ball up the floor. He has excellent vision and passing ability to set teammates up and is nearly impossible for any guard to contain single-handedly. He has Tony Parker quickness to get by opponents and into the lane, only he's 6-3 and can finish at the rim.

 

Cons: He's 6-3 and not 6-9 like Beasley. The bigger the player, the bigger their opportunity is to impose their will on games, or so the logic goes. Most of the lead dogs on recent NBA championship teams (Magic, Bird, Hakeem, Shaq, Duncan) have been 6-9 and over, with Jordan, Isiah and Wade being the exceptions.

 

Rose is not a lights-out shooter and often defers to teammates in the clutch. While he had a big scoring push in the final five minutes of the national championship game to give Memphis a nine-point lead, he still needs to work on his jump shot's consistency and range. He seemed to improve as the season went on, and has a solid shot, but he's not likely to be as big a factor scoring as Beasley in the short or long term.

 

Coming so close and not winning the national championship. Will this have a lingering effect on his career a la Chris Webber? Rose won't be viewed as the goat that Webber became after the time out incident. Not to mention, Rose's bad habits include eating candy for breakfast, which is a lot easier habit to break than Webber's well-documented recreational activities.

 

The Choice

 

Derrick Rose. If the decision is made to take the player that gives a team the greatest chance to win NBA titles, the obvious choice is Rose. The value of being able to impact a game individually as well as enhancing the level of teammates is too much to pass on. Rose also brings a greater impact on the defensive end of the floor, and while he likely will never match Beasley's offensive output, his overall impact on the game will be greater. So many NBA teams are rudderless, languishing through season after season with no direction. When you have a true point guard, like Williams or Paul, you have a team. As great as Paul is, a strong contender for MVP after leading the Hornets to a franchise best 56-win season, Rose has a chance to be as good, if not better.

[rangercal]

Derrik Rose baby. I'd package Hinrich & Gordon for a big, resign Deng, and pretty much go as is. Or package Hughes and someone for a big.

 

I'm excited.

I would think it would make more sense to package Hinrich and Gooden, Noah or Thomas rather than Gordon. If you trade Gordon then you have Hughes and Thabo as your primary 2's and a logjam at the 4 and 5 positions.

[whitesoxfan101]

I love that the Knicks fans are crying fix. KNICKS FANS, whose run of being good in the 90's was based on the draft lottery being invented, and fixed, for the soul purpose of saving their franchise with Patrick Ewing. That is delicious irony, and I just love how they still hate us for the 90's, Curry trade, and now this. And I'm seeming to gather that a lot of people agree that we should try and package some of the guys we have now in a trade before the draft, and pick according to who we can trade and what we get back. I would agree with that, as long as we don't trade the pick (with the exception of if Miami wants to move up the one spot).

[HuskyCaucasian]

I love that the Knicks fans are crying fix. KNICKS FANS, whose run of being good in the 90's was based on the draft lottery being invented, and fixed, for the soul purpose of saving their franchise with Patrick Ewing. That is delicious irony, and I just love how they still hate us for the 90's, Curry trade, and now this. And I'm seeming to gather that a lot of people agree that we should try and package some of the guys we have now in a trade before the draft, and pick according to who we can trade and what we get back. I would agree with that, as long as we don't trade the pick (with the exception of if Miami wants to move up the one spot).

I'll trade some of our guys to the Knicks for a few first round picks

Edited May 21, 2008 by Athomeboy_2000

[whitesoxfan101]

I'll trade some of our guys to the Knicks for a few first round picks

 

I think a trade will involve a guard or guards (Ben Gordon sign and trade perhaps or maybe just dumping Hinrich for bad contracts involving big men) to gain a bit more roster balance and take Rose. The alternative, also possible, is trading Gooden (he might actually have decent value) and then taking Beasley. Another alternative might be to trade Tyrus, but I don't think and don't hope Paxson has given up on him yet.

Edited May 21, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[HuskyCaucasian]

I think a trade will involve a guard or guards (Ben Gordon sign and trade perhaps or maybe just dumping Hinrich for bad contracts involving big men) to gain a bit more roster balance and take Rose. The alternative, also possible, is trading Gooden (he might actually have decent value) and then taking Beasley. Another alternative might be to trade Tyrus, but I don't think and don't hope Paxson has given up on him yet.

What is best for the Bull is that all those scenarios are on the table. The Bulls can talk around, see what people are willing to do and truely do what is best for the Bulls... not just for the next 2 years, but the next 10.

 

If the Bulls can send the guards packing for a Big man and then draft rose it's good. If the bulls can send one of our big men and Gordon for a SG and draft Beasley... it's good as well.

[Texsox]

Trust me. This is not the year of the #3 Pick.

There is no consensus #1 either. Always better to have a higher pick, but choosing #1 isn't fool proof. Plus, if the #1 consensus player does not fill a need, it becomes even more over valued. The Bulls got lucky the year they picked #3 and took MJ. They were hoping for a big man, and settled for the guy on the Olympic team who was flashy and would sell some tickets.

[rangercal]

There is no consensus #1 either.

 

There is a consensus top 2 though.

[lostfan]

There is no consensus #1 either. Always better to have a higher pick, but choosing #1 isn't fool proof. Plus, if the #1 consensus player does not fill a need, it becomes even more over valued. The Bulls got lucky the year they picked #3 and took MJ. They were hoping for a big man, and settled for the guy on the Olympic team who was flashy and would sell some tickets.

editing my own post for stupidity and to save embarrassment

Edited May 21, 2008 by lostfan

[jackie hayes]

He eats candy for breakfast?

 

Bring that man to Chicago, Pax.

[jackie hayes]

If they really wanted a big man they would've drafted Bowie.

Umm...

[rangercal]

If they really wanted a big man they would've drafted Bowie.

 

Bowie was #2

[lostfan]

Umm...

Heh, I was thinking in reverse. My bad.

 

But IIRC Perkins and Barkley were picked right behind MJ so my point still pretty much applies.

Edited May 21, 2008 by lostfan

[whitesoxfan101]

He eats candy for breakfast?

 

Bring that man to Chicago, Pax.

 

Yeah, he loves candy, is nicknamed "Pooh" which I believe is short for Winnie the Pooh, and is generally regarded as very quiet but a good leader. In terms of attitude and potential trouble factor, Rose has as big an advantage as you can get over Beasley, who is known to be a bit crazy and generally to have attitude problems (although to be fair, I don't think Beasley has had any sort of legal problems).

Edited May 21, 2008 by whitesoxfan101

[ZoomSlowik]

Yeah, he loves candy, is nicknamed "Pooh" which I believe is short for Winnie the Pooh, and is generally regarded as very quiet but a good leader. In terms of attitude and potential trouble factor, Rose has as big an advantage as you can get over Beasley, who is known to be a bit crazy and generally to have attitude problems (although to be fair, I don't think Beasley has had any sort of legal problems).

 

Eh, most of the character stuff comes from high school where he was a bit of a prankster and he coasted through games because he was exponentially better than everyone and could still dominate. Some have questioned his work ethic, but you don't get his kind of offensive repetoire without working on it. I wouldn't worry about that personally, there are far bigger pains in the ass in the league and few of them have his talent.

[jackie hayes]

I have no idea at all if this is realistic, but just suppose the Bulls were able to trade for another good, young pg. To make it concrete, say there's an opportunity to trade for Calderon. For those who prefer Rose, would you switch if the alternative was Calderon + Beasley, or would you stick with Rose?

 

Honest question, I'm not trying to lead, and I don't know which way I'd go. I'm just curious what the reactions will be.

[HuskyCaucasian]

I have no idea at all if this is realistic, but just suppose the Bulls were able to trade for another good, young pg. To make it concrete, say there's an opportunity to trade for Calderon. For those who prefer Rose, would you switch if the alternative was Calderon + Beasley, or would you stick with Rose?

 

Honest question, I'm not trying to lead, and I don't know which way I'd go. I'm just curious what the reactions will be.

I have said i prefer rose, but Pax has a LOT of options ont he table. If the Bulls can trade for an above average PG, then they can grab Beasley. If they can trade Gordon and/or Kirk for a big center, then I would take Rose.

 

I am ok either way, but i prefer Rose.