Rose Vs, Westbrook

[coldfish]

Obviously Westbrook and Durant are better than Rose. Just look at the stats. Don't pay attention to the games, team performance, point differential or anything though. Oh, and don't look at normal stats either (points rebounds and assists). Don't pay attention to the media or basketball insiders either. Nope.

This is obviously westbrook because Hollinger told me so.

I guess a 'normal stat' is the one that agrees with your perceptions? And the 'media and basketball insiders' excludes members of the media you do not agree with? Is Derrick Rose really better than Russell Westbrook because his team is a staggering 5 games better in a weaker conference, in the worst division in the NBA? Come on...

This is a legitimate comparison right now. That Inside Hoops article is spot on, I don't think anyone could break down the games of these two players better. I'd say Derrick Rose is still better, because his ability to direct an offense and play intelligently is more ingrained into his being. Russell still has what I call lizard instincts, that take over from time to time and negatively affect his decision making. But, sometimes that works out for the Thunder also, like last night's game against Portland.

Anyone who says this comparison is 'not close' doesn't have much ground to stand on, IMO.

The Bulls lead the league in point differential and the Thunder are 9th. The Bulls have the best record in the league against teams with winning records at 23-10. OKC is barely over 0.500 against winning teams at 22-18. The Bulls have a 21-7 (0.750) record against the west with several easy games remaining, OKC is only 26-17. I say all this with the Bulls missing Noah and Boozer for most of the season. With Boah and Boozer playing Chicago is 18-4 (67 win pace).

Anyone who says that OKC and Chicago are close doesn't have much ground to stand on.

So, why are the Bulls so much better than the Thunder? Coaching is part of it, but Brooks is no slouch. Rose being more effective at playing winning basketball is another big part of it. Everything from stopping runs to controlling game flow and a superior ability to create shots for himself and others.

[Rapcity_11]

Rose, not close. Westbrook isn't in the same stratosphere as Rose as a scorer. Seriously, people like to harp on Rose's efficiency; if Rose's is bad then Westbrook's is worse. 22 ppg on 45% eFG%. And Westbrook isn't the number one focus of opposing defenses like Rose is. ANd Chicago is WAY better than OKC. The Thunder are on pace to win 54-55 games. Chicago? 60. 60 wins is what separates a contender from a non contender. A team can win 54 or 55 games and lose in the first round aka '09 Spurs or '10 Mavs. You will be hard pressed to find a team win 60 games and lose in the first round.

1 point less per 36 mins on identical TS% and Westbrook isn't in the same stratosphere? What?

Their efficiency is identical.

[cwas2882]

Obviously Westbrook and Durant are better than Rose. Just look at the stats. Don't pay attention to the games, team performance, point differential or anything though. Oh, and don't look at normal stats either (points rebounds and assists). Don't pay attention to the media or basketball insiders either. Nope.

This is obviously westbrook because Hollinger told me so.

I guess a 'normal stat' is the one that agrees with your perceptions? And the 'media and basketball insiders' excludes members of the media you do not agree with? Is Derrick Rose really better than Russell Westbrook because his team is a staggering 5 games better in a weaker conference, in the worst division in the NBA? Come on...

This is a legitimate comparison right now. That Inside Hoops article is spot on, I don't think anyone could break down the games of these two players better. I'd say Derrick Rose is still better, because his ability to direct an offense and play intelligently is more ingrained into his being. Russell still has what I call lizard instincts, that take over from time to time and negatively affect his decision making. But, sometimes that works out for the Thunder also, like last night's game against Portland.

Anyone who says this comparison is 'not close' doesn't have much ground to stand on, IMO.

The Bulls lead the league in point differential and the Thunder are 9th. The Bulls have the best record in the league against teams with winning records at 23-10. OKC is barely over 0.500 against winning teams at 22-18. The Bulls have a 21-7 (0.750) record against the west with several easy games remaining, OKC is only 26-17. I say all this with the Bulls missing Noah and Boozer for most of the season. With Boah and Boozer playing Chicago is 18-4 (67 win pace).

Anyone who says that OKC and Chicago are close doesn't have much ground to stand on.

So, why are the Bulls so much better than the Thunder? Coaching is part of it, but Brooks is no slouch. Rose being more effective at playing winning basketball is another big part of it. Everything from stopping runs to controlling game flow and a superior ability to create shots for himself and others.

Noah or Boozer for most of the season. There's a big difference between those two statements.

[slick_watts]

Anyone who says that OKC and Chicago are close doesn't have much ground to stand on.

They are both good teams, which is enough for this discussion. Comparing a player on a good team to one on a bad team isn't really worth it.

So, why are the Bulls so much better than the Thunder?

It is very clearly due to the fact that they've played terrific defense all season.

Everything from stopping runs to controlling game flow and a superior ability to create shots for himself and others.

I do not feel Rose is better than Westbrook at creating his own shot. They are both unassisted on the bulk of their FGM.

How is the OKC starting offense after the trade?

It has its moments. It does look very Bulls like at times. But, it's not something that the Thunder did not see pre-trade either, as teams were figuring out that Jeff Green wasn't really a good shooter. But it's harrowing to watch Thabo's defender (for example) practically in the paint for entire possessions.

[slick_watts]

By the way, there is one aspect of Russ' game that has been developing that I think will be a huge factor in coming seasons - post game. He hasn't been 100% reliable with it yet, but it's coming along. He's looked GP-esque at times with it this year...

[Pass the ball]

Rose, not close. Westbrook isn't in the same stratosphere as Rose as a scorer. Seriously, people like to harp on Rose's efficiency; if Rose's is bad then Westbrook's is worse. 22 ppg on 45% eFG%. And Westbrook isn't the number one focus of opposing defenses like Rose is. ANd Chicago is WAY better than OKC. The Thunder are on pace to win 54-55 games. Chicago? 60. 60 wins is what separates a contender from a non contender. A team can win 54 or 55 games and lose in the first round aka '09 Spurs or '10 Mavs. You will be hard pressed to find a team win 60 games and lose in the first round.

1 point less per 36 mins on identical TS% and Westbrook isn't in the same stratosphere? What?

Their efficiency is identical.

I don't like TS. It makes Westbrook look better than he actually is because of his foul drawing ability. If you look at the difference in eFG% and ppg you'll see that Rose is a far better scorer than Westbrook. I think if you put Rose in Westbrook's situation and Westbrook in Rose's, then you'll see Rose's efficiency go up even higher while Westbrook's goes down. Westbrook is not cut out to be the go to guy while Rose can be the second or even third fiddle if need be. Westbrook on the Bulls wouldn't even be the first option. He would be second at best to Boozer IMO.

[Cliff Levingston]

I don't like TS. It makes Westbrook look better than he actually is because of his foul drawing ability. If you look at the difference in eFG% and ppg you'll see that Rose is a far better scorer than Westbrook. I think if you put Rose in Westbrook's situation and Westbrook in Rose's, then you'll see Rose's efficiency go up even higher while Westbrook's goes down. Westbrook is not cut out to be the go to guy while Rose can be the second or even third fiddle if need be. Westbrook on the Bulls wouldn't even be the first option. He would be second at best to Boozer IMO.

But the ability to draw fouls and get to the line is an important part of the game. Free throws are much better shots than everything else other than a dunk so that part of his game can't be discounted. If you want to try to knock down that aspect of his game, approach it from the standpoint that he doesn't have to face the double teams that Rose does and thus might have an easier time breaking down his man one-on-one in order to draw that foul.

If you put Westbrook on the Bulls, there's no way he wouldn't at least be on par with Boozer as a scoring option; the team wouldn't have any other choice due to the lack of guys who can create their own shot. That's the point though: OKC has the best scorer in the game for Russ to play off of, the Bulls don't. If nothing else, Rose gets points for doing what he's done as the focal point of the opposing defense every time he's been down the floor this season; you can't say the same for Westbrook.

[slick_watts]

That's the point though: OKC has the best scorer in the game for Russ to play off of, the Bulls don't. If nothing else, Rose gets points for doing what he's done as the focal point of the opposing defense every time he's been down the floor this season; you can't say the same for Westbrook.

I think this point is overstated, mostly due to the nature of Durant and Westbrook's games. They don't run any two man game or really interact much outside of some lobs and maybe a kick out three, or passes on curls / pin down screens. When Westbrook is isolating (which is how he gets the bulk of his points, much like Rose), Durant's presence on the perimeter is about as useful to him as any spot up shooter (Korver, etc.) would be.

Watching the two teams, I think Russ gets similar attention that Rose gets from defenses. These days I'd say Rose is guarded a little more closely on the perimeter, though.

[BrooklynBulls]

Rose has better scoring efficiency. Not because of TS, but because of turnovers. 3.9 TOPG with a 16% TO % while Rose is at 3.4 TO with a 12.9 TO percentage, with similar usage. It's not at all insignifcant and I dunno how it just gets glossed over all the time. It's why Westbrook's ORTG is 2 points lower than Rose's.

[slick_watts]

Rose has better scoring efficiency. Not because of TS, but because of turnovers. 3.9 TOPG with a 16% TO % while Rose is at 3.4 TO with a 12.9 TO percentage, with similar usage. It's not at all insignifcant and I dunno how it just gets glossed over all the time. It's why Westbrook's ORTG is 2 points lower than Rose's.

A Derrick Rose possession ends in a turnover about 2% less of the time than a Westbrook possession, but a Westbrook possession is 2% more likely to end in an assist.

Turnovers are a big difference between the two players, though, and that goes into their decision making abilities and probably Rose's ability to get his shot off cleaner in traffic. Russ seems to get called for charging a lot more often.

[BrooklynBulls]

Russ is just way more aggressive than Rose in his attack. Rose will slither through and around arms legs and torsos, Westbrook's going into you. It helps that Westbrook is taller than Rose, with good ability to go VERY high off the glass when he needs to.

Also to be considered is just how much Rose helps the Bulls spacing. 33% from three doesn't reflect it, but people are starting to faceguard Rose. Partly because they don't want him to get the ball, but also because teams know they have to close out if he he gets a kickout now, and when they close out, he takes a dribble with a completely open lane for a dunk. Westy's made some 3's, including a pretty damn impressive showing yesterday, but teams still let him take that shot. They're contesting Rose seriously now.

[CBS7]

Give me Rose, I don't think twice, and I don't believe its all that close.

Say what you want about Durant not having too much impact on Westbrook's scoring ability/efficiency, but Westbrook always has someone to take the pressure off of him. He plays alongside the league's leading scorer. For Rose, its basically always him and only him at the end of games.

[Rapcity_11]

Alright this is the way I see it:

Right now Rose is better. The margin isn't very big at all, but it's there.

Their production is a wash. Whatever one guy is ahead in, the other is ahead in something else to basically cancel out. On defense Rose has the edge, mostly due to intelligence and actually putting effort into it. So pretty big plus there for Rose.

Where Rose has separated himself from Westbrook is as a floor general/decision maker and having a more polished game. Rose has become pretty damn good in this area whereas Westbrook plays a much more out of control game.

Something that needs to be considered at least for me is that Westbrook plays like an idiot A LOT of the time. Far more often than Rose. Even so, their production is the same. So it becomes a matter of believing that Westbrook will grow into a better decision maker or not...? It's far from a guarantee.

I also see Westbrook as the more natural playmaker and slightly superior athlete. Just my opinion there. The opposite can certainly be argued pretty easily.

For those referencing team record, the Bulls are winning more because of elite defense and rebounding. That's the difference between the two teams right now. On offense OKC is better. Therefore Rose shouldn't be getting propped over Rose for team success. It's just not right.

Playing with Durant really doesn't open up the floor that much for Westbrook. Their starting lineup still has 2 complete non scorers and a raw second year guy still developing his game. Durant doesn't command off the ball double teams and it's not like KD is kicking out to Westbrook for jumpers. Most of Westbrook's offense is unassisted and created off ISO's. The guy sees a ton of defensive attention. What Durant does get him is a few easy assists when he curls off screens, but that's about it. They don't have much of a two man game at all. I'm pretty sure Westbrook's production with KD out of the lineup is still elite.

[stacey_is_king]

I still believe Rose receives more defensive attention, and is therefore performing nearly identically to Westbrook with a bigger burden. And so I'm inclined to say Rose is better.

[boogydown]

Right now, I'd say that the top 3 PG's in the NBA are Deron Williams, Derrick Rose, and Russell Westbrook and comparing which one is better is extremely difficult. Sorry Chris Paul, stay healthy and you'd be in the top list.

[jeff1624]

I'll take Rose. Rose seems like a more willing passer and he's a more efficient scorer/jump shooter too.

[Rapcity_11]

I'll take Rose. Rose seems like a more willing passer and he's a more efficient scorer/jump shooter too.

Westbrook averages a full assist more per 36 mins and they have identical TS%. Come again?

[jeff1624]

I'll take Rose. Rose seems like a more willing passer and he's a more efficient scorer/jump shooter too.

Rose averages a full assist more per 36 mins and they have identical TS%. Come again?

Rose IS a more willing passer, it's too bad he doesn't play with a top 5 player like Westbrook though. if he did he'd probably rack up more assists and wouldn't have to force anything on offense which would increase his efficiency.

[Cliff Levingston]

I'll take Rose. Rose seems like a more willing passer and he's a more efficient scorer/jump shooter too.

Rose averages a full assist more per 36 mins and they have identical TS%. Come again?

You mean Westbrook.

[RoseAboveDurant]

I'll take Rose

Rose doesn't have KD drawing defensive attention thus, Rose faces far more defensive pressure than Westbrook.

Bulls: 19 losses with Boozer and Noah missing significant amount of time. #1 seed in the East
Thunder: 24 losses with another elite scorer in the starting line up #4 seed in the West.