Image ImageImage Image

Stacy King feels we should take beasley

Moderators: HomoSapien, AshyLarrysDiaper, coldfish, Payt10, Ice Man, dougthonus, Michael Jackson, Tommy Udo 6 , kulaz3000, fleet, DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat, RedBulls23

Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#181 » by Leto » Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:08 pm

Bull Shak wrote:
_snake_ wrote:
Bull Shak wrote:ROSE IS A HORRIBLE JUMP SHOOTER.


Beasley shot 4 percent higher from the three point line than Rose.

Yes, Michael "super great amazing jump shot" Beasley shot 4 percent higher from the college three point line than Derrick "awful horrible poo-poo jump shot" Rose.

The hyperbole that's been thrown around in this thread is simply disgusting.


That puts Beasley at the 58th Percentile league wide. Beasley is an above average jump shooter in the NBA, and is probably above the 80th percentile for his position. Pretty good place to start in the pros!


Then why don't we just draft Brandon Rush at #1 instead of Rose or Beasley? AFter all, he shot 42 percent from 3 which is 4 points higher than HORRIBLE shooting Beasley and 8 points higher than HORRIBLE shooting Rose.

Let's see, what was the name of that guy who also had a questionable jumpshop coming out of college? Oh yeah, I remember now. His name was Michael Jordan.
magicfan4life05
RealGM
Posts: 23,617
And1: 198
Joined: Jun 29, 2005
Location: Welcome back the Comeback King !

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#182 » by magicfan4life05 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:25 pm

Bull Shak wrote:
TB#1 wrote:"Win now" implies a closing window of opportunity. That doesn't describe this team at all.

Its called getting BACK to winning now and positioning ourselves to continue to win for a lot of years to come.


No it doesn't. Win now implies that you want to win now.

Hornets are win now. Do they have a closing window?

The best player from the draft usually shows it pretty fast. Very rarely will he pop up and be the best a few years down the line...that is more the case with old school high school players. Now with having to go to school for one year, I think it will be less likely. If they aren't showing they are the best in the first 2 years, they never will likely never be the best in the draft class.

From the year before the lottery to 2005 draft...

Year: ROY / BEST

1984: Michael Jordan / Michael Jordan
1985: Patrick Ewing / Karl Malone
1986: Chuck Person / Chuck Person
1987: Mark Jackson / Scottie Pippen-Reggie Miller
1988: Mitch Ritchmond / Mitch Ritchmond
1989: David Robinson / David Robinson
1990: Derrick Coleman / Gary Payton
1991: Larry Johnson / Dikembe Mutombo
1992: Shaquille O'neal / Shaquille O'neal
1993: Chris Webber / Chris Webber
1994: Jason Kidd-Grant Hill / Jason Kidd
1995: Damon Stoudamire / Kevin Garnett
1996: Allen Iverson / Kobe Bryant
1997: Tim Duncan / Tim Duncan
1998: Vince Carter / Dirk Nowitzki
1999: Elton Brand-Steve Francis / Elton Brand
2000: Mike Miller / Michael Redd
2001: Pau Gasol / Pau Gasol
2002: Amare Stoudemire / Amare Stoudemire
2003: Lebron James / Lebron James
2004: Emeka Okafor / Dwight Howard
2005: Chris Paul / Chris Paul

So you have 1985, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1995, 1996, 1998, 2000, 2004.

Looking at the 1995 on ones is pretty easy.

1995- Kevin Garnett was a high schooler.
1996- Kobe Bryant was a high schooler.
1998- Dirk Nowitzki was a 17 year old from Germany.
2004- Dwight Howard was a high schooler.

These really young guys were fresh out of high school, and didn't have the benefit of college weight training, and had a greater adjustment time to the league.

2000- Michael Redd was a 2nd round pick. Crap draft. As a second round pick it took him longer to get into the rotation.

Then looking at 1985, 1987, 1990, and 1991 you just have to look at the college stats.

1985:
Patrick Ewing: 14.6 PPG 9.2 RPG 3.6 BPG (Senior)
Karl Malone: 16.5 PPG 9.0 RPG (Junior)

They were pretty equal, and Malone was a year younger. Both were great players here, their legacies about the same as a result of neither being able to get a championship.

1987:
Marck Jackson: 18.9 PPG 6.4 APG (Senior)
Scottie Pippen: 23.6 PPG 10.0 RPG 4.3 APG (Senior)
Reggie Miller: 22.3 PPG (Senior)

This one is pretty interesting. During their senior seasons, Jackson took a small step back in assists, while Miller in scoring...well I guess Jackson's wasn't slight...as Miller decreased about in 3 PPG and Jackson in 3 APG...and 3 APG is more drastic. Miller/Pippen were a tad bit better by the numbers.

1990: This is the one that you think supports Rose over Beasley, right? Not quite.
Derrick Coleman: 17.9 PPG 12.1 RPG (Senior)
Gary Payton: 25.7 PPG 8.1 APG (Senior)

Stats say take PAYTON, PAYTON, PAYTON. They went away from the stats and got burned.

1991:
Larry Johnson: 22.7 PPG 10.9 RPG
Dikembe Mutombo: 15.2 PPG 12.2 RPG 4.7 BPG

Stats say Mutmbo is going to be a great defensive player. Johnson did just about what it was predicted Johnson would do...but Mutombo became one of the best defensive players like his college stats indicated.

In conclusion, BEASLEY! BEASLEY! BEASLEY!


Im sure no one really cares what i think, and i was a rose supporter, but this post definitely has me questioning it......great post
Dwight Howard on his FT struggles:

"I just think everybody needs to stop talking about it," Howard said. "There's more to life than free throws."
TB#1
Banned User
Posts: 17,483
And1: 9
Joined: Jun 18, 2003
Location: Wossamotta U

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#183 » by TB#1 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:44 pm

Food for thought:

Full Article

One question is whether agents are steering their shooting guards, small forwards and point guards away from the Jazz, even though Kevin O'Connor and Co. have said they are committed to taking the best player available regardless of position.

It isn't hard to size up the current roster and see a glut of young shooting guards (Ronnie Brewer, C.J. Miles and Morris Almond) as well as an all-NBA point guard in Deron Williams and an emerging backup in Ronnie Price.

Walt Perrin, the Jazz's vice president of player personnel, said the team would bring in a group of wings for a workout. Jerry Sloan, meanwhile, told a story from his days coaching the Chicago Bulls and a mistake they made in the 1979 draft.

The Bulls missed out on the chance to draft Sidney Moncrief because they already had Reggie Theus on the roster and felt they needed a forward. They used the No. 2 pick on UCLA's David Greenwood; Moncrief went on to become an All-Star.

"We felt like we had to have a forward so we took a forward and passed on a guy who's an All-Star player," Sloan said. "That doesn't help the value of your franchise, in my opinion, when you make decisions that way."


The Squid
Greenwood
Leto
RealGM
Posts: 13,748
And1: 468
Joined: Jun 11, 2008

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#184 » by Leto » Tue Jun 17, 2008 1:52 pm

TB#1 wrote:Food for thought:

http://blogs.sltrib.com/jazz/2008/06/sunday-report.htm

One question is whether agents are steering their shooting guards, small forwards and point guards away from the Jazz, even though Kevin O'Connor and Co. have said they are committed to taking the best player available regardless of position.

It isn't hard to size up the current roster and see a glut of young shooting guards (Ronnie Brewer, C.J. Miles and Morris Almond) as well as an all-NBA point guard in Deron Williams and an emerging backup in Ronnie Price.

Walt Perrin, the Jazz's vice president of player personnel, said the team would bring in a group of wings for a workout. Jerry Sloan, meanwhile, told a story from his days coaching the Chicago Bulls and a mistake they made in the 1979 draft.

The Bulls missed out on the chance to draft Sidney Moncrief because they already had Reggie Theus on the roster and felt they needed a forward. They used the No. 2 pick on UCLA's David Greenwood; Moncrief went on to become an All-Star.

"We felt like we had to have a forward so we took a forward and passed on a guy who's an All-Star player," Sloan said. "That doesn't help the value of your franchise, in my opinion, when you make decisions that way."


That's the same thing the Blazers did in '84. They took Sam Bowie because they already had a shooting guard in Clyde Drexler. Of course, the rest is history since the Bulls took MJ the very next pick.
ATRAIN53
Head Coach
Posts: 7,461
And1: 2,562
Joined: Dec 14, 2007
Location: Chicago

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#185 » by ATRAIN53 » Tue Jun 17, 2008 5:22 pm

-hey Stacy remember that Bulls/Hornets game late last season where the Bulls were ahead and CP3 just took over and kept driving thru the Bulls defense and attackign the rim?

dribble penetration is what CP3 has and this is what the scouts are saying DR25 may have as well.

the Bulls already have 3 legit 20/10 threats at the FWD spots - Deng., Gooden and Tyrus and to a lesser degree Nocioni. if you add Beasley you are just creating a bigger log jam.

if we didn't have that logjam and there wasn't a lightning quick PG that has an explosive first step and the ability to finish strong at the rim i'd agree with Stacey and say draft Beasley too.
User avatar
treis
RealGM
Posts: 16,668
And1: 60
Joined: Mar 01, 2005

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#186 » by treis » Wed Jun 18, 2008 5:14 am

ATRAIN53 wrote:
the Bulls already have 3 legit 20/10 threats at the FWD spots - Deng., Gooden and Tyrus and to a lesser degree Nocioni. if you add Beasley you are just creating a bigger log jam.


Wha, ha, gargg Bulls Big men rrgg bad, rrrgg guards good!
Image
User avatar
The Evidence
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,071
And1: 1,629
Joined: Dec 07, 2004

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#187 » by The Evidence » Sat Mar 7, 2015 6:48 am

Why does Stacey King even have a job at this point?
User avatar
SSSFreak
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,340
And1: 854
Joined: Apr 19, 2009
Location: Sydney, AUS
 

Re: Stacy King feels we should take beasley 

Post#188 » by SSSFreak » Sat Mar 7, 2015 7:10 am

Holy Necro Batman!
Image

Return to Chicago Bulls