[color=#006400 said:

Mitch[/color]]When I hear sides are close I just assume 6 more weeks minimum.

Click to expand...

Don't blame you...they said playing by christmas after both sides are close. lol

One player I like to keep in mind when I look at Knight is Russel Westbrook. Westbrook primarily played SG in college, was a scorer and defender then, and now he's one of the top PGs in the league. Knight needs to take shots, because that's what PGs do nowadays (especially since defending PGs under current rules is almost impossible). But Knight is also a smart, hardworking kid. His rookie year may not be pleasant to watch always (lots of turnovers and perhaps screwy playing time), but I think if we actually keep up the development, he could end up being like Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, or even Westbrook with a jumpshot.

everyoneneedsasmil said:

One player I like to keep in mind when I look at Knight is Russel Westbrook. Westbrook primarily played SG in college, was a scorer and defender then, and now he's one of the top PGs in the league. Knight needs to take shots, because that's what PGs do nowadays (especially since defending PGs under current rules is almost impossible). But Knight is also a smart, hardworking kid. His rookie year may not be pleasant to watch always (lots of turnovers and perhaps screwy playing time), but I think if we actually keep up the development, he could end up being like Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, or even Westbrook with a jumpshot.

Click to expand...

The athleticism of Russell Westbrook and Brandon Knight are on two different stratospheres.. That's like comparing Carl Lewis to Tony Stewart athletically.. Doesn't compute at all..

tigers99888 said:

everyoneneedsasmil said:

One player I like to keep in mind when I look at Knight is Russel Westbrook. Westbrook primarily played SG in college, was a scorer and defender then, and now he's one of the top PGs in the league. Knight needs to take shots, because that's what PGs do nowadays (especially since defending PGs under current rules is almost impossible). But Knight is also a smart, hardworking kid. His rookie year may not be pleasant to watch always (lots of turnovers and perhaps screwy playing time), but I think if we actually keep up the development, he could end up being like Deron Williams, Chauncey Billups, or even Westbrook with a jumpshot.

Click to expand...

The athleticism of Russell Westbrook and Brandon Knight are on two different stratospheres.. That's like comparing Carl Lewis to Tony Stewart athletically.. Doesn't compute at all..

Click to expand...

Agreed..they are waaay different.

If we can use the pre-draft combine numbers as any gauge, they are about the same athletically. Westbrook is a little longer and heavier, but Knight matches him in every athletic test. It's easy to forget how athletic Knight is because he can shoot. Unlike Westbrook and Rose who MUST attack the paint to convert their shots, Knight doesn't need to physically dominate to play his game. But, that doesn't mean Knight is any less physically dominant. There is a reason he was projected to be taken 3rd overall by many (most) experts.

Also, it should be noted that Rose and Westbrook are generally inefficient scorers because of their lack of an outside shot. Knight has greater potential because he can already shoot.

D Rose is a career 47% shooter from the field and has one of the best mid range games of any pg in the league now. He also shot 33% from 3 this year which isn't killer but isn't terrible.

Westbrook shot 44% last year as well as 33% from 3. I'm not trying to be a dick but you can't just say stuff because it sounds good. Westbrook and Rose are special because they've added an outside attack to their viscious rack game. Rose was absolutely money at times from 20 feet.

Compare to Chris Paul who is a career 47% shooter with a 35% mark from 3.

Westbrook shot 37% on all jump shots last year, despite taking almost 2/3rds of his shots on jumpers. His 33% from 3 is deceiving because he rarely takes any threes. Defenses plan around his bad shooting, which is why he (and Rose) shot under 40% during the playoffs - when defenses keyed in on his glaring weakness.

Rose's mid-range game has certainly improved, but I hardly call 44% on jumpers "devastating." Further, his three point shooting percentages were a mirage. He was hot at the start of the year for a month (maybe a little more), but fell off precipitously as the year went on. He hit less than 30% of his threes in the postseason despite having defenders primarily sit back and wait for him in the paint.

Westbrook, at least, has really not added an outside attack at all. He's content to sit back and brick open jumpers. Just ask any Thunder fan, Westbrook's weakness is his inability to pass up what is, for him, a bad shot. Rose is more effective as a shooter, but not a deep threat most nights. The comparison to Chris Paul is also somewhat faulty because Paul is a pass-first PG. He makes up for his less than stellar outside shooting with his ability to create shots for others. And even then, he shoots better than Rose or Westbrook and draws fouls just as well also.

Also notable is that Paul has been playing with injuries for a few years now. And for the last 4 years, he's been nearly a 50-40 guy.

My point is that Rose and Westbrook are certainly special talents, but not unstoppable or incomparable. Athletically, Knight is on par with Westbrook, who is on par with Rose. Knight, however, already has consistent range on his jump shot. Whether he develops the rest of his game (passing, limiting turnovers, picking his spots offensively) is obviously up for debate, but there's no reason to suggest he doesn't at least have the same or greater (due to his range) potential than those two.

I fully understand Rose had his struggles in the post season but his mid range game last year was excellent. If you're talking 3 pointers as outside shots, sure they have their struggles but I watched plenty of Bulls games and enough Thunder games to say that they can both shoot it. Rose routinely is forced into bad shots by teammates not moving without the ball or Thibbs calling straight iso's. While the Bulls are no slouches, with a better offensive supporting cast, I believe his numbers would be better. That guy was worn down by the end of the year from carrying that team on his shoulders all year long.

You also have to take into account Rose's obvious ability as an NBA star. He made 16 3 pointers for a season, and after 1 summer was banging them home. He's only going to get better n better imo. This guy grows by leaps n bounds in just months. Rose is not allowed to "let the game come to him"..quite frankly, he is the game and that team only wins when he goes. I'm not doubting that Knight could have a better shot at this point but the NBA is a whole nother game. JJ had one of the best shots I've ever seen but struggled to get open looks in the NBA even though he could hit from damn near half court on the run at Duke. This ain't Kentucky where your team is head n shoulders above the competition talent wise and you roam around with 5 feet of space between you and potential defenders.

Sure you can say he has the potential to be as good as Rose but hey Kwame Brown had the potential to be a dominant big man in the NBA and he's trash.

As for Westbrook, I'll back off a bit. Westbrook has shown flashes to be a Ben Gordon streaky shooter but you're right, he shoots a ton of bad shots and has strings of poor shooting nights. After watching all 3 play a descent amount I will say that I think Rose and Westbrook are on a different level of athletisim compared to Knight no matter what the "measurements" tell you.

Not to mention his improved 3 point shooting and very refined mid range game are what were responsible for winning him the MVP. He absolutely tortured other guards in the regular season, forcing them to play up on him in fear of him draining that elbow jumper.

I don't want to really get into it, but Rose never deserved that MVP. He wasn't the best at anything, nor the best all-around force. His team wasn't nearly as improved with him on the court vs. off as you should expect from an MVP. The fact is, the voters didn't want to give another one to Lebron (who was the best player in the game) and the Magic didn't win enough games (poor reasoning since Dwight is easily the second best player in the league). If Rose has the same numbers on the same team for the rest of his career, he will never win another MVP, because his victory was about how surprisingly good the Bulls were, not how transcendent Rose was.

But hey, I agree that potential doesn't mean much unless you utilize it. The fact remains, though, that Knight has the potential to be as good as Westbrook and Rose. I question our ability to develop that potential (who is the last player the Pistons drafted that really developed like we thought he would... Tay?), but I don't question the actual potential. Being able to shoot is huge in this game. Defenses killed two of the best PGs in the game during the postseason because neither are consistent shooters. That COULD help Knight a lot. But, we need to see it first. We need a season and we need a team that actually plays a winning style of basketball. And only then can we even begin to look at what Knight can do.

everyoneneedsasmil said:

I don't want to really get into it, but Rose never deserved that MVP. He wasn't the best at anything, nor the best all-around force. His team wasn't nearly as improved with him on the court vs. off as you should expect from an MVP. The fact is, the voters didn't want to give another one to Lebron (who was the best player in the game) and the Magic didn't win enough games (poor reasoning since Dwight is easily the second best player in the league). If Rose has the same numbers on the same team for the rest of his career, he will never win another MVP, because his victory was about how surprisingly good the Bulls were, not how transcendent Rose was.

But hey, I agree that potential doesn't mean much unless you utilize it. The fact remains, though, that Knight has the potential to be as good as Westbrook and Rose. I question our ability to develop that potential (who is the last player the Pistons drafted that really developed like we thought he would... Tay?), but I don't question the actual potential. Being able to shoot is huge in this game. Defenses killed two of the best PGs in the game during the postseason because neither are consistent shooters. That COULD help Knight a lot. But, we need to see it first. We need a season and we need a team that actually plays a winning style of basketball. And only then can we even begin to look at what Knight can do.

Click to expand...

We'll see. I would tend to agree with your arguement about the MVP other than this cae. I think it was between him and Howard. Lebron just frankly had so much help that those numbers weren't good enough. I hate to punis h the guy for that but it's how I feel. Howard was dominant but couldn't put that team oin his back...Rose did that. You're crazy if you think Rose didn't impact the success of his team more than any other candidate. the heat aren't much worse without Bron, and the Magic still make the playoffs without Dwight...Bulls miss the playoffs without Rose. Boozer and Noah missed extensive time in which rose completely carried the team. Deng is a good role player but not much more. Rose deserved the MVP but I wouldn't "shut down" arguements for Bron n Howard.

I am a fan of advanced statistics, in which Rose does not fair nearly well enough to deserve the award. The Heat were around 10 points better per 100 possessions with James on the floor, he made a huge difference despite how good his teammates are. Howard was the same, making a huge impact on both ends of the floor. Rose? Chicago was a mere 2 points better with him on the court. The reason? Chicago won with defense.

Rose made the defense worse by about 7 points, but made the offense better by about 9 points. Chicago didn't need Rose to be the scorer he was to win, they did that by locking down opponents. Boozer and Noah are not nearly as important as their contract size would presume, as Boozer has been a net negative for years (gives up more than he gets, plus Gibson is solid in all areas) and Noah was actually outperformed by his backup Omer Asik. The Bulls are actually worse overall with Noah and Boozer playing than Gibson and Noah. So to say Rose didn't have much help offensively is true, but to say he didn't have much help is very false. The backbone of the team (defense) was built on the backs of guys not named Rose all year.

everyoneneedsasmil said:

I am a fan of advanced statistics, in which Rose does not fair nearly well enough to deserve the award. The Heat were around 10 points better per 100 possessions with James on the floor, he made a huge difference despite how good his teammates are. Howard was the same, making a huge impact on both ends of the floor. Rose? Chicago was a mere 2 points better with him on the court. The reason? Chicago won with defense.

Rose made the defense worse by about 7 points, but made the offense better by about 9 points. Chicago didn't need Rose to be the scorer he was to win, they did that by locking down opponents. Boozer and Noah are not nearly as important as their contract size would presume, as Boozer has been a net negative for years (gives up more than he gets, plus Gibson is solid in all areas) and Noah was actually outperformed by his backup Omer Asik. The Bulls are actually worse overall with Noah and Boozer playing than Gibson and Noah. So to say Rose didn't have much help offensively is true, but to say he didn't have much help is very false. The backbone of the team (defense) was built on the backs of guys not named Rose all year.

Click to expand...

I'm the oppostie, I'm not a fan of advanced stats. I think most of them are skewed in so many ways. I especially hate +/-...that has to be the most useless stat ever presented. Sure it may be good at finding out what group works best but player to player it has little to no meaning at all.

To my point again Rose had the entire offense on his shoulders for most of the season, enough to take it's toll on anyone. I agree with you about Gibson and Boozer but that just furthers the point of even more burden on Rose. Boozer was no where NEAR the threat offensively the Bulls had anticipated him to be. With no 2 guard the ball was always in Rose's hands and he was ALWAYS looked on to make the play. You can look at Asik's numbers all you want but he was good because he played short spans..Noah was definitely the better player. Asik actually lead the league for most of the year in RPM but was he actually the best in the game? Not a chance...more skewed stats. He played his role well but not much beyond that.

We can both agree that the team was builty on the principle of being a defensive stopped but without Rose that team finishes in the bottom half of the league. He meant as much or more to his team than anyone in pro basketball. I would say between him, Dirk and Durant they carried their respective teams more than anyone in the league. Without them Chi and OKC don't make the playoffs, let alone a 2nd round birth.

As said before, I completely understand arguements for James and Howard but IMO Rose was as deserving as anyone for what he was asked to do on a nightly basis. Nobody had as much responsibilty night in and night out other than a possible Nowitzki...even Durant had Westbrook to take some burden off of him.

Knight seem less athletic than he is because he had to fill john wall's shoes. But he was athletic.

Did Westbrook come out as a freshman?

But when Rose or Westbrook are hitting from threes, they're near unstoppable.

Sorry but combines mean jack in basketball.. You are comparing a former track athlete converted to Basketball player in Westbrook to a spot up shooting half court player.. KNights ceiling is more Billups to me which isn't all bad.. He is going to have to use his size as a 1 to post up the smaller PGs in the league.. Atm he is considered a hybrid and if he becomes a #2 he will fail as he's too small and not athletic enough to guard the average 2..

This team just needs a star, flat and simple.

Knight could develop into one, but Im booking on us getting a Harrison Barnes or Dummond/Davis.

Also gotta say, Ive seen Jerebko at Oakland a couple times, and hes gotten bigger. Really think hes gonna make a huge impact if we ever get basketball this year.



Knight
Stuckey
Jerebko
Davis
Monroe

I would prefer Andre Drummond to all three of the top prospects as I think he has both the most upside and fills the biggest need, but so far he hasn't done much in the early CBB season.. We shall see if he improves.. Barnes looks like the real deal as well but we already have a stockpile of 2s and 3s so I see no point on taking him unless they decide to clean all the trash on the roster and trade away some of the current youngs to make room for him..

Drummond makes the most sense if he reaches his potential, but you have to have a ton of determination and willpower to become a star in this league. Davis and Barnes both seem much more interested and focused on the court. I would bet they turn out to be the better pros.

And, from a fit perspecive, I think Davis is the best. Monroe doesn't strike me as athletic enough to guard mobile 4s. Also, the less he strays from the basket (where he is highly effective), the better. Davis can guard 4s, can play an inside-out game, and will really help on the boards. Drummond might be a great defensive center, but his offensive game is more limited than Monroe's.