More on Chicago's #1 pick

Josh did a pretty good job of summarizing his thoughts on the Bulls' #1 pick in the upcoming NBA draft, but I thought I should add my two cents. As Josh mentioned he is a Bulls fan and approximately .2 seconds after the Bulls won the lottery, he called to ask me "if the Bulls could f*ck up this pick?" Unfortunately, I missed his call, but my answer is yes, the Bulls can f*ck this up.

The potential for screwing this up comes down to overrating Derrick Rose and maybe overrating the importance of point guards in general. First, let's look at Derrick Rose. I think Rose is has the chance to be very good pro, but he is not the player that some are making him out to be. Mike D'Antoni described Rose as "Jason Kidd with a jump shot." I cannot overstate the ridiculousness of that statement. How many players in the history of the NBA could legitimately be described as "Jason Kidd with a jump shot?" I can come up with maybe two; Pete Maravich and Oscar Robertson. To suggest that Derrick Rose is of that caliber is outrageous. And when you look at Rose's skills and statistics this comparison becomes even more preposterous. Kidd averaged 8.4 assists over his two years at Cal and had an assist-to-turnover ratio over 2. Rose, on the other hand, averaged just 4.7 assists/game with an assist-to-turnover ratio under 2. But at least Rose is a better shooter, right? Well, no. Kidd averaged 14.9 ppg over two year and shot 33% from 3. Guess what, Rose's averages were exactly the same.

So, Derrick Rose isn't Jason Kidd and he's definitely not an improved version of Jason Kidd, but he can join the current ranks of point guards like Chris Paul and Deron Williams, right? Maybe. I've yet to see the decision-making from Rose to suggest that he is at their level, but maybe that will develop over time. But even if it does, how much does that matter? How important is the PG to the success of an NBA team? Well, from my point of view, not quite as important as some seem to claim. People point to the "success" of Utah and New Orleans and use that as "proof" of the importance of point guards. So let me ask this, how many NBA teams have won championships with great PGs? I'm not counting Tony Parker or Chauncey Billups. Both are good players but neither are the primary reason that their teams won championships. The last team to win by being led by a PG was the 1990 Detroit Pistons. Over that same span, teams led by big guys (Tim Duncan, Shaquille O'Neal and Hakeem Olajuwan) have led their teams to 9 NBA titles and teams led by scoring guards (Kobe Bryant, Michael Jordan, Dwayne Wade) have also won a number of titles. Meanwhile, the best point guards of the recent era (Stockton, Nash, Payton, Kidd) have combined for 1 title and that title (Payton winning with Miami in 2005) had very little to do with Payton's presence. This suggests that the best-case scenario for Rose is that he develops into a scorer, who can play a few minutes at the point (maybe it's just me, but if your looking for a guy like that in this draft, the pick is OJ Mayo).

Josh also did a good job summarizing Beasley's upside, so I won't get much into that. I keep seeing people predict that Beasley will but up 20 and 10. Well, if that's what the Bulls expect, then there's no way he shouldn't be the first pick in the draft. Only three guys in the NBA averaged 20 and 10 this year (Dwight Howard, Carlos Boozer, and Al Jefferson). In the Spurs four championship seasons, Tim Duncan averaged 20 and 10 each year. In fact, I've yet to read or hear anyone question any part of Beasley's game. Conversely, with Rose, we see potential, but many still question almost every aspect of his game.

So, yes, the Bulls can mess this up and to suggest that they can't is incomprehensible. There are plenty of examples of teams drafting a very good player but passed over an all-star (Glenn Robinson ahead of Jason Kidd, Jerry Stackhouse/Rasheed Wallace over Kevin Garnett, Bowie over Jordan, Sam Perkins over Charles Barkley). And while there is a decent chance the Bulls will end up with at least a very good player, the mistake most often associated with high draft picks is not a total "miss" but the instead the missed opportunity from passing on the next great NBA talent. And while my opinion is most likely biased, Michael Beasley has the most potential to be great.

Bulls Win NBA Draft Lottery

The NBA Draft is one of those events every year that I absolutely love more than is reasonable, especially considering that although I enjoy the NBA, I am no junkie. I love college basketball not only for the sport itself, but I enjoy trying to project how players will translate to the NBA. There are three dates marking three events regarding the draft that I look forward to before the draft itself. I like looking at the early entry list, I enjoy the lottery, and I enjoy seeing which early entry candidates players pull their names from consideration.

I am also a Bulls fan. Winning the lottery has just added a whole new level of excitement for me and it also opens the door to a solid month-long argument that can be summed up in three words: Beasley versus Rose. A brief look at some Bulls message boards makes it pretty clear that Rose would be the more popular pick and it’s a sentiment I understand but I think represents a bit of confusion about these players.

First of all, the Bulls are extremely lucky to end up with either of these players and I am thrilled. People look at what Deron Williams and Chris Paul have done for their teams and they want the next Williams/Paul. The NBA, like seemingly all professional leagues, is a copycat league and it makes sense because those are two wonderful point guards. Naturally several fans are excited about “bringing Rose back home to Chicago” and having their very own Williams/Paul. Although Rose has a huge upside and will likely be a very good pro, I don’t see him on that same level. It has been said that Rose’s poor assist numbers are due to the Dribble-Drive Motion offense and Memphis’ relatively poor perimeter shooters. There is almost certainly some truth to that. However, whereas some have described Rose as a “Jason Kidd with a jump shot” I would argue Rose has nowhere near the floor vision of a Kidd (or Paul or Williams) and although his physical skills are obviously impressive, he’s not a great jump shooter either. Despite some of Rose’s limitations, the Bulls would clearly be a better team with him on the roster.

But they’d be an even betterer team with Beasley on the roster. Beasley’s talents are incredible. He’s a fantastic rebounder, and an unbelievably versatile scorer. The Bulls’ roster has been criticized for lacking a back to the basket scorer. Not only could Beasley fill that need but he could do that while still providing a better jumper than Rose (while still having enough quickness and ball-handling ability to likely be able to drive off most guys that would be guarding him). I have read some fans comparing Beasley to Carmelo Anthony and I think that’s a terrible comparison. Anthony doesn’t rebound nearly as well, nor does he have near the interior scoring ability of Beasley. They really are not comparable players at all. There are obviously question marks with Beasley, such as his potential tweener size, questionable shot selection, and possible ambivalence towards playing defense. However, Beasley’s skill set would fit in perfectly with the other young post players, Joakim Noah and Tyrus Thomas, the Bulls currently have on the roster as he can provide something different.

So, my early assessment (that honestly is not going to change) is that the Bulls really should take Beasley and although I’d consider taking Rose to be a mistake it would be about as good of a mistake as you can make.

Preparing for the NBA Conference Finals

So, round two of the NBA playoffs are in the books and things could not have been more disappointing. I think if I had to pick my least exciting NBA Conference Finals in the East and West I would have picked just the match-ups we have. At least the lottery is tonight so we have something to look forward to.

Eastern Conference

(1) Boston Celtics beat (4) Cleveland Cavaliers 4-3

(2) Detroit Pistons beat (3) Orlando Magic 4-1

At the beginning of the year I underrated Boston, saying they were the seventh best team in the NBA and the third best in the East behind the Pistons and……ugh, the Bulls (a homer pick that went horribly wrong). I thought Allen was about to hit a severe down slope in his career, Pierce was perhaps a bit overrated, and everyone outside of the big three were horrible (I loved Garnett and saw a MVP caliber season from him). So, naturally the Celtics came out and dominated the regular season. I’m feeling a bit vindicated right now because the Celtics seem to be the worst team still standing based on their play in the playoffs. The Pistons are right here where they’re supposed to be as they are riding that impressive starting five to the Eastern Finals yet again (although I’m liking their bench more this year than in years past). But I’m sick of the Pistons. I can’t stand to watch them anymore. Despite wanting to feel vindicated by seeing the Celtics lose, I can’t root for the Pistons. Plus, it’s not like the Celtics are a team of unlikable guys; I would argue it’s actually the opposite (outside of Posey anyway). Really the reasons I dislike the Celtics are because they were better in the regular season than I thought they’d be and I felt they received more kudos than were deserved and they’re from Boston and I’m sick of seeing Boston teams be good. Despite this, I must root for them to beat the Pistons but I’m not happy about it. I’m also not happy that I really don’t see the Celtics being able to beat the Pistons. Allen is looking old and bad and this team just sucks outside of Boston. Some of those criticisms against Garnett that were around in Minnesota (shrinking down the stretch in big games) are showing up again in Boston. I’m guessing Detroit finishes off this series in 6.

Western Conference

(1) Los Angeles Lakers beat (4) Utah Jazz 4-2

(2) San Antonio Spurs beat (2) New Orleans Hornets 4-3

I’m not going to be able to adequately describe my disappointment at the outcome of these two series. The problem with the Lakers-Jazz series was just that the Lakers were better and the main reason the Jazz were able to stay in as they were is that Kobe sometimes still forgets that his teammates are skilled and he can be really stupid. There were stretches where this series was a lot of fun to watch because it actually involved some beautiful teamwork and ball movement. I guess that’s what you get when you have a series with two of the league’s great coaches. It needs to be pointed out that the Lakers’ third option, Odom, tends to get forgotten a lot behind Gasol and Kobe, but he was really fantastic in this series. The other series was even more frustrating. In the first three games in New Orleans the Hornets were lights out from three-point range and won on the glass. In the decisive Game 7 the Hornets couldn’t make anything and they got killed on the boards. I don’t want to hear the experience card either. One of the worst players for the Hornets was Peja and he has had plenty of playoff experience. The Hornets just sucked a bit more than the Spurs sucked. So, how we have to deal with the Spurs for yet another year against the freaking Lakers and I have no choice but to root for the Spurs, as sick as it makes me. Unfortunately the Spurs have their worst team in a few years and the Lakers are really good. The greatest shot the Spurs have is Kobe sabotaging the series for the Lakers and that’s certainly possible. I don’t think the Lakers will have too much trouble and I’ll pick them to win in 5.