If you had the #1 pick who would you pick ?

[Zone034life]

Quote:

---

If I remember correctly, just about everybody I know was all for the firing of Billy Knight because he consistently drafted forwards (except for Acie)... Yet, alot of people on here are for taking Beasley over Rose or Mayo? Hmmm...

7

You knw whats interesting is people are actually trying to rationalize the Hawks picking Beasley over Rose. Billy Knight thought the same way but got killed for actually doing it. It shows that fans are just arm chair quarterbacks and complain after the fact. Many fans would have taken Marvin over CP3 and Deron Williams. But since Billy did they want to kill him but forget that they also wanted or didn't have a problem getting Marvin.

Everyone who complained about Billy drafting forwards and are now saying take Beasley over Rose are hypocrites. If you didn't complain about Billys drafting and you want Beasley then thats fine.

[ATLBob]

Quote:

---

Chris Paul and Deron Williams were better college players than Derrick Rose

I realize that you are probably using the "eye-test" here, but this is an interesting statement none-the less.

By most any statistical analysis this statement doesn't have much support. All were starters as freshman. Deron's ppg were much lower that Rose and Paul's, who are basically a wash (14.9 v. 14.8). Assist numbers are similar for all three, advantage Paul if forced to choose. Rose rebounded at a far superior rate than either of the other two. Paul shot a better percentage from 3. FG%'s are a wash. All have intangibles, and are consummate leaders.

Obviously, I disagree strongly with your assessment. I too watched all three play in college, and would place them all in the same upper echelon. Rose will have a similar impact as these two, and any team would be very lucky to have any one of these players.

Quote:

---

I like Rose, I see why he is a top 2 pick, but he isn't Paul or Williams in terms court vision or shooting ability

This is interesting, too. Court vision seems subjective, so (I think his court vision roughly equals theirs as freshman) ...

Paul has a much higher 3% as a freshman, and has the highest FG% as well. Rose and Williams are close in 3%, slight advantage Williams. Rose actually had a higher FG% than Williams, though, and a much much higher FT%. (Paul wins FT% too). So, while you could make the argument that Paul was a superior shooter at the same stage in his development, you cannot argue the same for Williams nearly as successfully. Rose shot more, and made more as a freshman. He was a more aggressive player than Williams as a freshman ... and Williams turned out pretty good, didn't he.

I'm not sold on Beasley's leadership or maturity, so gimme Rose. (I'd also take Chris Paul or Deron Williams over Durant ... crazy, I know).

[ATLBob]

Too be fair, Beasley actually dominated as a college freshman.

Marvin did not.

Hence the analogy, while interesting, is unfair.

Beasley (freshman) +> Marvin (freshman

[Lascar78]

Couldn't disagree more. I think Beasley is overrated as is Mayo to some extent. Rose is the only real star prospect, and the only guy that I would trade real assets to get.

And don't get me started on the most overrated group of big men in a long while. We got lucky that our no-pick year came this year.

[EazyRoc]

Derrick Rose, man. Beasley is going to able to score and will be a solid rebounder, but I just get the feeling he'll never be any good on defense. Derrick Rose is a potential do-it-all superstar PG. He can penetrate off the dribble and is a great finisher. He is a floor general with good vision and a pass first mentality. He's a solid defender now with potential to be great and he has a 6'8" wingspan. He'll definitely be one of the most athletic point guards in the league. He's got good strength, and will probably be able to post up smaller PGs. As long as he stays healthy, I can see him being every bit as good as Chris Paul or Deron Williams.

[Traceman]

I think Rose would be a GREAT PG for us. His athleticism, ability to push the ball and ability to penetrate would make everyone around him better. We could then combine Bibby's and Zaza's expiring contracts to go after a superstar or a quality big. I'm not a Jermaine O'Neal fan because of his age, health issues and huge salary but how good would:

O'Neal/Solo

Horf

Smoove/Marv

JJ/Chillz

Rose/Acie

be? I'm not sure who would start where and I wouldn't care who else was on the roster (though another shooter would be nice). What a fantasy!

That said, I think Beasley is a TERRIFIC fit in CHI or MIA. Beasley is going to be close to a 20/10 guy off the bat if used properly. I think CHI would be better off building around Beasley, Deng and Gordon than Rose, Deng and Gordon. In MIA, I think Beasley, Marion and Wade are a playoff team.

[crimedog]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Chris Paul and Deron Williams were better college players than Derrick Rose

I realize that you are probably using the "eye-test" here, but this is an interesting statement none-the less.

By most any statistical analysis this statement doesn't have much support. All were starters as freshman. Deron's ppg were much lower that Rose and Paul's, who are basically a wash (14.9 v. 14.8). Assist numbers are similar for all three, advantage Paul if forced to choose. Rose rebounded at a far superior rate than either of the other two. Paul shot a better percentage from 3. FG%'s are a wash. All have intangibles, and are consummate leaders.

Obviously, I disagree strongly with your assessment. I too watched all three play in college, and would place them all in the same upper echelon. Rose will have a similar impact as these two, and any team would be very lucky to have any one of these players.

Quote:

---

I like Rose, I see why he is a top 2 pick, but he isn't Paul or Williams in terms court vision or shooting ability

This is interesting, too. Court vision seems subjective, so (I think his court vision roughly equals theirs as freshman) ...

Paul has a much higher 3% as a freshman, and has the highest FG% as well. Rose and Williams are close in 3%, slight advantage Williams. Rose actually had a higher FG% than Williams, though, and a much much higher FT%. (Paul wins FT% too). So, while you could make the argument that Paul was a superior shooter at the same stage in his development, you cannot argue the same for Williams nearly as successfully. Rose shot more, and made more as a freshman. He was a more aggressive player than Williams as a freshman ... and Williams turned out pretty good, didn't he.

I'm not sold on Beasley's leadership or maturity, so gimme Rose. (I'd also take Chris Paul or Deron Williams over Durant ... crazy, I know).

Appreciate the analysis. You caught me, I was definitely comparing freshman Rose to the older incarnations of the other two, however that is all you can really do right? In terms of court vision, you are right, its subjective. I just didn't see "dynamic playmaker" when I watched Rose. I saw "dominant athlete with enough vision and unselfishness to take advantage of the mismatches he created" but I didn't see pure point-guarding like I did with the other two.

The problem, obviously, is that you can't extrapolate and say that "since the other two improved to X degree statistically, Rose would have too". Rose was one of the most physically developed freshman point guards I've ever seen. As far as Williams FT%, that screams anomoly, but you are right Rose' was better.

Anyway, I'll agree with you on the Durant thing. Although I like Beasley better as a prospect because, unlike KD, he has broader shoulders than most middle schoolers.

[crimedog]

On top of that, I think this whole "character" thing is getting a little retarded.

From what I can tell, Beasley played a prank in high school and boasts about how good he is and that makes him a bad kid and Rose cries when he loses.

I'm sure Beasley is immature, as he probably should be. Rose is the one that said he would "hate it" if he got drafted by Miami - I guarantee you that if Beasley said that it would be another example of his immaturity but when Rose says it, he's just selling himself to Chicago.

[SmooveTheFuture]

this is Paul over Marvin all over again. Rose all the way Point guards are harder to find then wings just ask the Hawks.

[crimedog]

Quote:

---

this is Paul over Marvin all over again. Rose all the way Point guards are harder to find then wings just ask the Hawks.

Yeah, thats a good strategy to use if everything else is equal but if the power forward is a better player than the point guard, you don't take the point guard.

[Yeti]

None of the above. I'd take Mayo. I was not a fan until I saw him play in person and I was shocked at what a good all round player he was. Didn't try to impress or get flashy but he just got the job done and dominated the game.

[Atlantaholic]

Quote:

---

this is Paul over Marvin all over again. Rose all the way Point guards are harder to find then wings just ask the Hawks.

Yeah, except that Beasly is 5 times the freshman Marvin was, and Rose is probably not going to be as good as Paul.

If I had to pick between these two players I'd go with need... If I was Chicago, for example, I would go with Beasly and keep Heinrich... I think it is smarter, because if they pick Rose then they NEED to trade Heinrich and his value is probably the lowest it has ever been... I doubt they would get anything good for him.

[Zone034life]

Quote:

---

Too be fair, Beasley actually dominated as a college freshman.

Marvin did not.

Hence the analogy, while interesting, is unfair.

Beasley (freshman) +> Marvin (freshman

Unfair? Unfair is agreeing with a pick when a GM makes it and later on killing him for making it when someone behind the pick plays better. But that is the nature of the job. There were plenty of people who called Billy out,and some still do, so now I am calling out all the fans who once killed his decisions and now want to duplicate them. And your comparison is wrong:

Marvin in college

D.Rose in college(he won more) = M.Beasley in college(better individual statistics)

So if all is equal and you chose Beasley when we already have Marvin, Smoove, Horford and chillz then how are you different from BK? You're not but whoever does will try and spin it to make themselves look right. Just as Billy did after he drafted Marvin and Shelden. I'm just glad that BK nor the people who would draft Beasley are the GM of this team.

[PlayaPat420]

I would take Rose all day. To me, Beasley actually seems over hyped. He isn't 6'8-6'10 like they said in college and he dominated in a weak bball conference. Kansas won the title from that conference but the other teams were weak, IMO. And they're compairing him to Derrick Coleman... which isn't all that tight if you ask me.

[Guest Walter]

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

this is Paul over Marvin all over again. Rose all the way Point guards are harder to find then wings just ask the Hawks.

Yeah, except that Beasly is 5 times the freshman Marvin was, and Rose is probably not going to be as good as Paul.

If I had to pick between these two players I'd go with need...

Actually, you are agreeing with the above poster in a way AtlHolic. I wouldn't simply have picked Paul over MW because he was a Pg but because we NEEDED a Pg (already having Al, Diaw, JC, JS at the Sf/forward positions. This is very much Paul/Deron or MW and we saw how badly BK screwed that because he couldn't see the potential in smaller players and was wrongly enamored by the MW, UNC title hype.

W

[crimedog]

Quote:

---

Marvin in college

D.Rose in college(he won more) = M.Beasley in college(better individual statistics)

So if all is equal and you chose Beasley when we already have Marvin, Smoove, Horford and chillz then how are you different from BK? You're not but whoever does will try and spin it to make themselves look right. Just as Billy did after he drafted Marvin and Shelden. I'm just glad that BK nor the people who would draft Beasley are the GM of this team.

Some interesting math you got there, what is the name of that rule?

You do realize that Rose stepped into a program that had gone to the elite eight for the prior two years whereas Beas came to a team that hadn't made the tourney in over a decade, right?

Odds are kinda stacked in Rose' favor for the "team success" part when the rest of the team is better.

[ATLBob]

Quote:

---

I'm just glad that BK nor the people who would draft Beasley are the GM of this team.

Agreed.