Could Mayo be our pick ? With article.

[Wade2k6]

Other players:

Chris Kaman 7'0-.5 with shoes on and a wingspan of 6'11.75 at predraft measurments. Beasley has a better wingspan then Kaman despite being around 4 inches shorter.

Amare was 6'10 in shoes, an inch 1/2 taller then Beasley, yet his wingspan was an inch longer.

Horford had the same wingspan and standing reach and he did very well his rookie year.

Again, just showing that alll this "he's too small" talk is pointless.

[abark]

-= original quote snipped =-

Beasley is almost the same height as Haslem, has one extra inch in standing reach than Haslem, and all I hear from most Heat fans, is how small Haslem is, but know that you have a man crush on Beasley, he know he is huge. Beasly is 238 pounds. LeBron a SF weights 250. Yes by all accounts the guy is undersized if he is planning to go vs Duncan, KG, Rasheed, and a ton of PF's.

No matter how much spinning you do for your boy. The guy is 6 7. Yes that is small for PF.

Anyone that says that Beasley's NBA height is 6'7 does not understand how NBA heights are taken. Rose, without shoes ,measured at just over 6'1. Rose measured at a little over 6'2 with shoes which is why he will be listed at 6'3. If anything I was more surprised by Rose's measurements than I was by Beasley's.

Since Beasley is over 6'8 with shoes he will be listed at either 6'8 or 6'9 (probably 6'8'). Beasley also has a 35 inch vert, a standing reach an inch under 9 feet, and he is 240 lbs. Tyrus Thomas had the exact same height with shoes and was listed at 217 lbs when he was drafted.People are making way too big a deal about an inch, especially when we are talking about a guy that is easily skilled enough to play the sf position anyway.

[HeatSince88]

-= original quote snipped =-

Beasley is almost the same height as Haslem, has one extra inch in standing reach than Haslem, and all I hear from most Heat fans, is how small Haslem is, but know that you have a man crush on Beasley, he know he is huge. Beasly is 238 pounds. LeBron a SF weights 250. Yes by all accounts the guy is undersized if he is planning to go vs Duncan, KG, Rasheed, and a ton of PF's.

No matter how much spinning you do for your boy. The guy is 6 7. Yes that is small for PF.

Isn't 6'7 much taller than 6'1"?

And how does a 6'7" guy have faster lane agility than the "quick" 6'1" guy? LOL. Haven't seen you mention that one yet.

Oh yeah, one last thing ... we have the #2 pick - we don't have a choice between the two! Seriously, why don't you go to the Bulls board and argue this crap? They actually have a choice between the two.

[SA37]

People are too obsessed with size.

The NBA has had countless numbers of players who weren't the right size, but still managed to have good or great careers.

Dennis Rodman: led the league in rebounding for several years. He was listed at 6-8, but a lot of people believed he was closer to 6-6.

Barkley was one of the better rebounders in the game when he played and he was 6-6 in shoes (6-4 w/out).

Shawn Marion is 6-7 3/4 in shoes (6-6 1/2 w/out) and has played PF.

Carlos Boozer is 6-7 3/4 w/out shoes (He must have worn high heels at the combine because he measured at 6-9 1/2 in shoes )

Elton Brand 6-8 1/4 w/out, 6-9.5 with.

Udonis Haslem 6-6 3/4 w.out 6-7 3/4 with

Antawn Jamison 6-7 3/4 w.out. So probably 6-9 with.

Larry Johnson 6-5 1/2 wout, so probably 6-7 with.

Al Jefferson 6-8 1/4 without, 6-9 3/4 with.

Kurt Thomas 6-7 3/4 without shoes.

David West 6-8 1/4 wout, 6-9 1/4 with.

[Lane1974]

also, when Lebron is the standard for size at SF, that's not fair either
he's an effing freak of nature, the gold standard.... Tayshaun Prince also is a SF in the central division and is probably 50 pounds lighter than Bron Bron... if you're waiting for us to draft a guy who can stop LeBron, we'll never find one...

[CoolD]

-= original quote snipped =-



Isn't 6'7 much taller than 6'1"?

And how does a 6'7" guy have faster lane agility than the "quick" 6'1" guy? LOL. Haven't seen you mention that one yet.

Oh yeah, one last thing ... we have the #2 pick - we don't have a choice between the two! Seriously, why don't you go to the Bulls board and argue this crap? They actually have a choice between the two.

Rose plays point, and the fact the guy has 5. 5 inch difference on Beasley is probably a bit scary.

We probably don't have an option to get Rose. But Beasley could easily get traded to another team.

Wasn't this thread about such a thing happening, with Mayo.

[HeatSince88]

-= original quote snipped =-

Rose plays point, and the fact the guy has 5. 5 inch difference on Beasley is probably a bit scary.

While you misinterpret and harp on one number (height, where Beasley will be listed at 6'8 to '6'9 in the NBA), allow me to illuminate some other items you tend to pass over.

Let's put YOU on the defensive about Rose regarding some very glaring weaknesses of his compared to Beasley, rather than everyone having to argue with you incessantly about Beasley's height:


- Why did Beasley blow Rose away in lane agility?

- Why is Beasley a better FG shooter than Rose?

- Why is Beasley a better 3PT shooter than Rose?

- Why is Beasley a better FT shooter than Rose?

- Why does Beasley get the the FT line more?

- Why does Beasley grab 8 more rebounds a game than Rose?

- Why does Beasley get more steals than Rose?

[CoolD]

[quote="HeatSince88"][/quote]Why did Glenn Robinson have much better College stats than Jordan.

Because he played in College.

The NBA and College game are nothing alike.

Why did Rose team had a college record in most College wins in one season.

While Beasley had 12 losses.

Oh yeah Beasley played with scrubs.

Or maybe Beasley had good stats because he played in a sorry team, kind of like Kurt Thomas did in College.

[perz260]

Funny i don't remember Kurt Thomas beating the eventual NCAA tournament winner in college, but then my memory is fuzzy about 90's college players. I like Rose a whole lot too, but u didn't answer his questions that had nothing to do about putting up stats..why did have a better lane agility test result, than a point whose main asset is supposed to be his speed. Now a power forward may have a better % in fg since u would assume he takes easier shots, but to have a better free throw %, and 3 point % too?. I hope in your comparison u are not saying the beasley is like glenn robinson and that rose is like jordan.

[GameTime_3]

Honestly, if CoolD had his Choice im sure we would be Sending,
D-Wade-2# and a 1st in 2010 for 1#(Rose is MJ)

[CoolD]

Funny i don't remember Kurt Thomas beating the eventual NCAA tournament winner in college, but then my memory is fuzzy about 90's college players. I like Rose a whole lot too, but u didn't answer his questions that had nothing to do about putting up stats..why did have a better lane agility test result, than a point whose main asset is supposed to be his speed. Now a power forward may have a better % in fg since u would assume he takes easier shots, but to have a better free throw %, and 3 point % too?. I hope in your comparison u are not saying the beasley is like glenn robinson and that rose is like jordan.

.

Rose no step vertical 34.5
Beasely no step vertical 30

Rose maximum vertical 40
Beasley maximun vertical 35

Rose 3/4 3.05
Beasley 3/4 3.24

I could probably make an educate guess. Rose probably hasn't practice that drill. A mistep or two could slip you a second.

Am not worried about those agility numbers one bit. Is probably an anomaly.

[Wade2k6]

-= original quote snipped =-

.

Rose no step vertical 34.5
Beasely no step vertical 30

Rose maximum vertical 40
Beasley maximun vertical 35

Rose 3/4 3.05
Beasley 3/4 3.24

I could probably make an educate guess. Rose probably hasn't practice that drill. A mistep or two could slip you a second.

Am not worried about those agility numbers one bit. Is probably an anomaly.

Everybody expected Rose' times to be incredible. The fact that a 6'8-6'9 PF beats him in an agility drill is very impressive. Not only the fact that he beat Rose, but that he was within the top 10 of the entire draft camp on that drill.

On the 3/4 court run only 5-6 players over 6'8 beat Beasley. Every other player that beat him was a PG and they should be able to beat Beasley in a 3/4 court sprint.

[rockman0825]

to be honest rose would be great to draft... if the bulls had any sense we would have our man... but now we have to decide between beasley oj mayo or bayless... i still like the idea of going for boozer or brand... and just trading back to lose cap so that we can make some signings in the future(next yr) but truth of the matter is that mayo looks amazing and bayless looks just as good

[heat4life]

It amazes me just how much importance some people put to a 1" or 2" difference in height. I mean, have you ever stood next to a person an inch shorter or taller than you? Do you honestly feel that person has a height advantage or disadvantage on you?

It is ridiculous to keep discussing physical attributes (or lack there of). I mean if it was THAT important, why Anthony Randolph is not the #1 pick?

We discuss the fastest, the tallest, the shortest, the slimmer but we have yet to argue the basketball side of it. why? is it because it would be redundant to discuss two (or 3) players who are at the top of their games at their respective positions? Is it because it would mean that regardless of the player, two (or 3) teams are going to be very happy at the end of the draft?

NOBODY knows (not even GM's) how their college success is going to translate to the NBA. Nobody knew Kobe was going to be Kobe, or Jordan was going to be Jordan or Garnett was going to be Garnett or Wade was going to be Wade. If not they would've been the 1st pick in their respectives draft (Wade #2 only to LeBron and his deserved hype).

IMO it would be more beneficial to break down each player's game, the pluses and minuses and see where that fits with the teams and how much room for improvement they have. That makes more sense than arguing 1 or 2 inches socks or shoes on players.

[SmushedPennies]

-= original quote snipped =-

.

Rose no step vertical 34.5
Beasely no step vertical 30

Rose maximum vertical 40
Beasley maximun vertical 35

Rose 3/4 3.05
Beasley 3/4 3.24

I could probably make an educate guess. Rose probably hasn't practice that drill. A mistep or two could slip you a second.

Am not worried about those agility numbers one bit. Is probably an anomaly.

Were you insane before you heard of Derrick Rose?

[CoolD]

It amazes me just how much importance some people put to a 1" or 2" difference in height. I mean, have you ever stood next to a person an inch shorter or taller than you? Do you honestly feel that person has a height advantage or disadvantage on you?

It is ridiculous to keep discussing physical attributes (or lack there of). I mean if it was THAT important, why Anthony Randolph is not the #1 pick?

We discuss the fastest, the tallest, the shortest, the slimmer but we have yet to argue the basketball side of it. why? is it because it would be redundant to discuss two (or 3) players who are at the top of their games at their respective positions? Is it because it would mean that regardless of the player, two (or 3) teams are going to be very happy at the end of the draft?

NOBODY knows (not even GM's) how their college success is going to translate to the NBA. Nobody knew Kobe was going to be Kobe, or Jordan was going to be Jordan or Garnett was going to be Garnett or Wade was going to be Wade. If not they would've been the 1st pick in their respectives draft (Wade #2 only to LeBron and his deserved hype).

IMO it would be more beneficial to break down each player's game, the pluses and minuses and see where that fits with the teams and how much room for improvement they have. That makes more sense than arguing 1 or 2 inches socks or shoes on players.

Wasn't Beasley supposedly 6 10.

And know we find out he is 3 inches shorter.

Wade measured 6 ft 3 3/4 without shoes.

The NBA has him at 6 4.

Wade gained a total of a quater inch. Not 2 or 3 extra inches everyone wants to gift wrapped on Beasley's measurements.

If Wade was actually 6 ft 3/4 inches. Would Wade still be a dominant SG.

He might be a pointguard at the hight.

My point is not about Beasley's skills, is more of what position will he actually play. A scorer will be able to score, am sure Beasley will have his numbers in offense. But will he be able to defend.

6 10 compared to 6 7, is a big difference.

Do you think Wade would be the same player at 6 ft 3/4 inches.

I think the size is legitimate not about Beasley skills, but actual position.

If people say, oh well, he is still going to dominate at SF, it would be okay. But people seem to think he is going to dominate at PF. And I think this measurements might make you think twice, how dominant of a PF can he ever be.

[CB4MiamiHeat]

funny how the other top PFs in the draft, Kevin Love and Darrel Arthur, are never questioned on what position they play..they're PFs in everyones eye.

Beasley has the same exact wingspan and standing reach as them. Only reason why people say he cant play PF is because on top of banging down low ...he can shoot, dribbles well, has quick first step .. the fact that he can also do those things is used as a negative.

[HeatInOhio]

There's no point making a case with CoolD, he's just not going to believe that Beasley can play PF well because of an inch in height. If he was one inch taller, then in shoes he would be 6'9" - 6'9.5" which would be pretty standard.

Beasley has the same standing reach and vertical that Al Horford does who just played center all season and played it well. A player's vertical and standing reach is more important than height when its a matter of an inch or two. Beasley is the total package and if we end up w/ him @ 2 then that's fantastic. If we get Rose, that's fantastic as well.

[heat4life]

Wasn't Beasley supposedly 6 10.

And know we find out he is 3 inches shorter.

I can't confirm that he was listed at 6'10, I always saw 6'9 as his most used height just like Rose was listed as a 6'4 guard. So what. Shoes, no shoes, the bottom line is Beasley will be listed (I will bet any money) at least as a 6'8 PF where Rose will be listed as a 6'3 PG. Book it. It still doesn't take away from the fact that both are VERY capable players and we are lucky to have one or the other.

Wade measured 6 ft 3 3/4 without shoes.

The NBA has him at 6 4.

Wade gained a total of a quater inch. Not 2 or 3 extra inches everyone wants to gift wrapped on Beasley's measurements.

If Wade was actually 6 ft 3/4 inches. Would Wade still be a dominant SG.

He might be a pointguard at the hight.

what? are you serious? Wade would be Wade regardless of what height he is listed as. You know who Allen Iverson is? Try to tell him he wouldn't have his game because of his size. When you can play, you can play end of story.

My point is not about Beasley's skills, is more of what position will he actually play. A scorer will be able to score, am sure Beasley will have his numbers in offense. But will he be able to defend.

6 10 compared to 6 7, is a big difference.

Can Shawn Marion (6'6 in chancletas, 6'7 in shoes) play PF?
There are some players that are gifted, versatile and are just pure basketball players. Beasley is one of them. We are not talking about a one dimensional player here.

Do you think Wade would be the same player at 6 ft 3/4 inches.

I think you need to give up using Wade as an example. It doesn't help you. See above.

I think the size is legitimate not about Beasley skills, but actual position.

If people say, oh well, he is still going to dominate at SF, it would be okay. But people seem to think he is going to dominate at PF. And I think this measurements might make you think twice, how dominant of a PF can he ever be.

The bottom line dude is that we just don't know how or where each of these players is going to dominate. We could discuss basketball skills all day long to figure out what position best suits each player in the NBA. That at least it's reasonable but I just find arguing size as ridiculous. We are not talking about a 6'0 player trying to dominate the PF spot or a 5'5 PG entering the league as the top pick.

Now, let me see you talk about skills on each player for a change to make your points. If you can.

[CoolD]

-= original quote snipped =-



The bottom line dude is that we just don't know how or where each of these players is going to dominate. We could discuss basketball skills all day long to figure out what position best suits each player in the NBA. That at least it's reasonable but I just find arguing size as ridiculous. We are not talking about a 6'0 player trying to dominate the PF spot or a 5'5 PG entering the league as the top pick.

Now, let me see you talk about skills on each player for a change to make your points. If you can.

Anyone that thinks Allen Iverson doesn't suffer in defense, do to his size hasn't watched basketball for a long time.

Allen Iverson all his career has had position identity crisis. He has been moved from SG to PG all the time.


But Allen Iverson is a great scorer. That is able to make up for some his deficiencies to a degree in the offense of end, because he is so dominant in offense, but still is garbage in defense.

Beasley could be that guy. But alot projections have him scoring around 20 points.

If those projections are true, he would not be able to outright make up for his defensive deficiencies.

Difference between Kobe and A.I. One, is one sided player. That only plays offense(AI). Kobe that has such hight advantage, can actually play defense while still being a super dominant scorer do his size for position.

Now, will Beasley be such a great scorer, to make up for his size? Even if that happens. He will never be truly complete. Like Allen Iverson that is a horrible defender. But the fans will forget, because offense sells tickets and jerseys, defense wins Championships.