Advertisement

Sunday, June 22, 2008

Self debates NBA’s top draft picks

Kansas State freshman Michael Beasley, left, and coach Frank Martin listen to questions at a news conference. Beasley announced his decision to enter the NBA Draft in April.

Kansas State freshman Michael Beasley, left, and coach Frank Martin listen to questions at a news conference. Beasley announced his decision to enter the NBA Draft in April.

Advertisement

There's a great debate raging not only in the city of Chicago, but around the country as Thursday's 2008 NBA Draft nears.

That is ... which player should be tapped No. 1 overall by the NBA's Bulls? Should it be guard Derrick Rose or forward Michael Beasley?

Perhaps there's nobody better to ask than a man who coached against both players - Kansas University's Bill Self.

His Jayhawks went 1-1 against Beasley's Kansas State Wildcats and 1-0 versus Rose's Memphis Tigers.

"I think Beasley is the best player," Self said, "but I think Rose will be picked first."

Self explained his reasoning.

"In large part because it's Chicago," Self said of the Bulls wanting to draft a hometown hero out of Simeon High of the city's Public League. "Secondly, if you look at great NBA teams over time, you either need somebody to anchor it (at center) or a great point guard.

"Michael's teams won without either one of those because it was Michael," Self added of small forward Michael Jordan's six NBA championship Bulls teams. "Go back to Olajuwon (center Hakeem, Rockets), Duncan (center Tim, Spurs), the Lakers (guard Magic Johnson, center Kareem Abdul-Jabbar) ... they either had a great 'big' or point (guard) or both. Those are the two hardest positions to get. I have to believe they'll take Rose."

Beasley is not considered a franchise center. His official NBA measurement is 6-81â4 in shoes, meaning he'll play power forward or small forward in the NBA.

Beasley did the most damage against the Jayhawks.

He scored 25 points off 9-of-18 shooting, including four of four three-pointers, and grabbed six rebounds in KSU's 84-75 victory over KU in Manhattan. He had 39 points off 11-of-23 shooting (four of seven threes) with 11 rebounds in the Jayhawks' 88-74 win in Allen Fieldhouse. He made 13 of 16 free throws in that second contest.

Rose, who officially measures 6-21â2, scored 18 points off 7-of-17 shooting, including one of six threes, in KU's 75-68 national title victory over Memphis. Rose also had six rebounds, eight assists and five turnovers in that game.

"I'd take Beasley in a heartbeat as a talent," Self said without hesitating, asked which player he would rather coach in college. "That does not mean anything at the next level. You look at the next 15 years of a guy's career, you want to have a great point guard. You want a great big man.

"Beasley is hard to guard without question," added Self, who lost sleep trying to put together game plans for Beasley. "But that doesn't mean anything. Jason Kidd (guard) was not as hard to guard as Grant Hill (forward) coming out either. Grant Hill had a great career, but it turned out Jason Kidd was a pretty good point guard over time.

"Rose's job is not to score. His job is to win and he's pretty good at that."

¢

Jayhawks in Portland: KU's Brandon Rush and Mario Chalmers had impressive workouts with the Portland Trailblazers on Saturday.

"Brandon looked very good," Blazers' general manager Kevin Pritchard, a former Kansas guard, told oregonlive.com. "Mario is an impressive shooter."

He was asked if Chalmers could play the point in the NBA.

"That's the question," Pritchard said. "He showed some point guard skills out here."

Of Rush, he said: "He is ready-made for the NBA right now. He can help a team right now. He can shoot it and defend. He's a spot up shooter, which every team needs. He can defend threes, twos, maybe even point guards."

¢

KU's Fab Five: Self said he expected five Jayhawks to be selected in the draft. First round locks are Rush, Chalmers and Darrell Arthur. Sasha Kaun and Darnell Jackson could go in Round Two with Russell Robinson generally regarded as somebody who will not be drafted.

Here's how some experts rank the KU players heading into the final days before the draft, which will be held in New York. KU's Arthur and Rush will attend draft proceedings at Madison Square Garden.

Draftexpress.com: Brandon Rush, No. 17 first round, Toronto; Darrell Arthur, No. 18 first round, Washington; Mario Chalmers, No. 27 first round, New Orleans; Sasha Kaun, No. 22 second round, Miami; Darnell Jackson, No. 27 second round, San Antonio.

NBAdraft.net: Arthur, No. 16 first round, Philadelphia; Chalmers, No. 20 first round, Denver; Rush, No. 22 first round, Orlando. Jackson and Kaun undrafted.

Sportsillustrated.cnn.com: Rush, No. 15 first round, Phoenix; Arthur, No. 27 first round, New Orleans. No second round predictions.

RealGM.com: Arthur, No. 14 first round, Golden State; Chalmers, No. 20 first round, Denver; Rush, No. 23 first round, Utah; Jackson, No. 24 second round, Houston; Kaun, last pick of second round, Boston.

Sportingnews.com: Rush, No. 16 first round, Philadelphia; Arthur, No. 18 first round, Washington; Chalmers No. 26 first round, San Antonio. No second round predictions.

ESPN's Chad Ford: Rush, No. 13 first round, Portland; Arthur, No. 18 first round, Washington; Chalmers, No. 26, first round, San Antonio. No second round predictions.

NBC.com: Arthur, No. 9 first round, Charlotte; Rush, No. 23 first round, Seattle; Chalmers, No. 27 first round, San Antonio. No second round predictions.

CBSsportsline.com's Kenny Eggers: Rush, No. 17 first round, Toronto; Arthur, No. 18 first round, Washington; Chalmers, No. 27 first round, New Orleans. No second round predictions.

CBSsportsline.com's Jeff Reynolds: Arthur, No. 15 first round, Phoenix; Rush No. 16 first-round, Philadelphia; Chalmers, No. 29 first round, Detroit. No second round predictions.

Foxsports.com: Arthur, No. 16 first round, Philadelphia; Chalmers, No. 20 first round, Denver; Rush, No. 22 first round, Orlando. No second round predictions.

More like this

Comments

yates33333 (anonymous) says...

You wonder where Larry Bird, Bob Pettit, Elgin Baylor,etc., fit into Coach Self's thinking about NBA drafts of point guards and centers as primary to a team.

June 22, 2008 at 5:39 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KoolKeithFreeze (anonymous) says...

Um, also have to mention the recently crowned Celtics here, no?

June 22, 2008 at 5:50 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

plasticJHawk (anonymous) says...

I agree KKF, Rondo and Perk aren't exactly considered franchise players

June 22, 2008 at 7:14 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Solomon (anonymous) says...

Was there a dominate center or point available when Bird, Pettit, Baylor were drafted? Besides, Self wasn't talking about always drafting a center or a point, he said every team needed one or the other (unless you have a Jordan). Boston had Garnett to anchor the middle.

June 22, 2008 at 7:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

melrank (anonymous) says...

Mock drafts apparently are little more than someone throwing a dart onto a board somewhere and then pretending to be an expert when predicting the real outcome.Of the 10 mentioned, both Rush and Arthur are pegged at 6 different spots with a range falling somewhere between 9 and 27. At best, 80% of these drafts will not get Rush's draft spot right. Heck, looking at Mario's projections is like playing roulette.I realize this isn't an exact science, but are these guys actually getting paid to do this?I bet a collaboration of the bright minds on this board could do as well as most of these "experts".

June 22, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

rcaltrider (anonymous) says...

"Self added of small forward Michael Jordan's six NBA championship Bulls teams"Umm, Michael Jordan was a shooting guard, Pippen was the small forward.

June 22, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

doolindalton (anonymous) says...

"Secondly, if you look at great NBA teams over time, you either need somebody to anchor it (at center) or a great point guard."Don't the Bulls already have a great point guard named Kirk Hinrich? I wouldn't exactly put Rose in the "great" category after watching him being contained nicely by KU's perimeter players in the championship game.

June 22, 2008 at 9:04 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

rohdek (Kyle Rohde) says...

Doolindalton, Hinrich had a terrible year last year and is not in the same category as Rose, talent-wise. He's a good NBA player but Rose has the chance to be a star. I'd take him too.

June 22, 2008 at 9:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

livedeadhead (anonymous) says...

When did this turn into a religious board - don't post that crap on here - the state of Kansas is already a joke with its brainwashed jesus freaks so please don't contribute to thatIf you think the act of putting ink under your skin is a sin you are a nutball. M. Beasley again gets a bad rap for no reason other than he smiles a lot

June 22, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

Winterhawk (anonymous) says...

Mario's shot was no miracle. This is all about basketball, not religion. If that's what you want to talk about djkc28 then go to church. Let everyone make their own choices.

June 22, 2008 at 10:25 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

BoulderHawk (anonymous) says...

rohdek: Yes , Hinrich did not have a good year, neither did most of the Bulls. "Rose has the chance to be a star" Sounds you suffer from the same disease most NBA GMs have, "Delusions of Upside". Darko Milicec also had the chance to be a star. So one bad year and toss out Hinrich? I guess they should do the same for most of that team. Ben Wallace had a bad year with the Bulls also. It's a good thing they got rid of him. According to you his career is over. I am a Bulls and Hinrich fan but with the brain trust in place in Chicago I am actually hoping Kirk gets a chance to play for a contender some where else because Chicago is not going to contend for some time to come. Vinny Del Negro? please. After the Scot Skiles debacle they needed to hire a proven coach , not a former player and broadcaster who has never coached. So if they bow to local pressure to draft a local rather then using their brains and drafting what they need , a forward that can score, then I am pulling for both Hinrich and Gooden to end up on a contender. I used to be a big Paxson fan also but just because you were a clutch NBA guard does not mean you are a clutch NBA GM(giving tons of money to a great defensive player when you had a good defense and really needed a big man who could score). For those that look at the character issue. If you are looking to the NBA players of today for character then you are shopping in store with only a few shelves stocked (Kirk is on one of those shelves). Ask Joakim Noah about character. You can probably catch him after his court appearance on possession charges. If you are looking to NBA players as role models and are an adult then you have a lot more to worry about than the NBA draft.

June 22, 2008 at 10:31 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KEITHMILES05 (anonymous) says...

Preach it brother, preacher it!

June 22, 2008 at 10:54 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

oldboy (anonymous) says...

It appears that Chad Ford and Kevin Pritchard may see Rush the same way. Pritchard says that Rush is ready to help an NBA team right now as a spot up shooter, and as a defender of 2 or 3 players and maybe even a point. Ford lists Rush as #13 by Portland. Maybe Pritchard is only a fan and ex-player for KU and then maybe he really does like what he saw when Rush worked out for him. I don't think Pritchard was talking from being a supporter of his alma mater. Portland is looking to improve as much as possible and Rush just may be the man to push them along because of his talents.

June 22, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

sevenyearhawk (anonymous) says...

WTF with all of this religious mumbo jumbo this week?!?http://www.pocm.info/

June 22, 2008 at 11:18 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

waymilky (anonymous) says...

"He leads a sinful life. His numerous tattoos are just the beginning".I would never have a tatoo, but I see this as a personal choice, not a moral choice. Sinful?While it may help greatly to have a great center or point guard, I don't know that it helps anymore than to have a great two guard or small forward such as MJ in the past or PP in the present.

June 22, 2008 at 11:24 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

dagger108 (anonymous) says...

rcaltrider - Thanks for posting the positional correction of MJ being a SG with Pip at SF. To extend that thought a bit further and tie it into the C's, da' Bulls 6 championship teams were all built around those 2 and Horace Grant at PF with role players who know where to spot up and how to defend. Sounds rather similar to PGA (Pierce, Garnett and Allen) and crew.My guess is that you'd find 3 studs and a group of role players being a more common theme among NBA Champions. TV alluded to that a bit during game 6's historical tangents. Kirk would make a great member of the role players, but won't be the star to lead the way - in the NBA. It is rather a crap shoot who the stars will be. MJ was chosen behind 2 C, and PP behind 9 others, tho I believe KG was #1 out of Chi-town. My fear as a Bulls fan is that Rose would be a home town bust similar to the C they recently jetisoned to NY. That's a lot of pressure for an instant millionare kid to lead the homies to a championship (expectations).

June 22, 2008 at 11:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

plasticJHawk (anonymous) says...

chill out peopleI am pretty sure djkc28 was poking fun at all of Michael Beasley's alleged "character issues"

June 22, 2008 at 12:44 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Sparko (anonymous) says...

Rose would not even be in my top-ten. I think he has skill but has maturity issues. Especially in a home-town environment. The Jayhawks out there look to be real steals in their projected areas of the draft. Every available Jayhawk will out-work their peers. Heck, Russ Rob is worth a number 2 pick just for defense. We'll see. If Chicago passes on Beasley, they are crazy. He has mad skills. Reminds me of last year's draft.

June 22, 2008 at 1:16 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

JJHawq (anonymous) says...

I'm biased - but I can't believe its even a debate. I take Beasley.

June 22, 2008 at 2:01 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

derringer29 (anonymous) says...

bottom line i saw both players in the biggest games of there lives and the hands down fav..was the beast..i not a beasley lover at all but you could see the difference clearly

June 22, 2008 at 3:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

justanotherfan (anonymous) says...

The draft projections shift based on team need, who was taken, etc. For instance, some drafts think that Minnesota will go big and take Brook Lopez. Others think Minnesota will go with a guard. If the Wolves go with a guard, that means that Lopez is still on the board. If that happens, he may go at 5 or 6, pushing other guys down the list. It has a ripple effect. As one guy moves up or down, the rest of the list moves around them. For instance, a lot of draft gurus put Rush at 15 to Phoenix. If however, the Suns go a different direction, Rush falls into the 20, maybe to Orlando. The draft isn't just about ranking the prospects in order, 1-60. It's about matching teams. Chad Ford is the best, because he has more inside team sources than some of the others do.

June 22, 2008 at 4:11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

mushhawk (anonymous) says...

remove those 2 turds from our front page!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

June 22, 2008 at 4:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

bigjay83 (anonymous) says...

Isn't Spongebob the antichrist?

June 22, 2008 at 5:39 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

LAJayhawk (anonymous) says...

"His Jayhawks went... 1-0 versus Rose's Memphis Tigers."Wait, when did that happen?I'm certainly no NBA expert, but it seems to me Mario would be a pretty good fit in San Antonio. A contender that could use his defense and shooting skills off the bench. I still don't understand how you can pass on Beasley, but I'm pretty sure the Bulls will take Rose. Being my hometown, I know how much pressure there is to take him; not because of the ties to Chicago, but for the fact that Bulls fans don't trust drafting a small forward (and one under 6'9" at that). It's a shame, but if Rose can help get them back to the playoffs, I will take back my disgust at passing on Beasley.

June 22, 2008 at 5:53 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

jaybate (anonymous) says...

Rose was supposed to be this terrific big guard. But he's not even 6'3" tall. No wonder our 6'1" no-necks (Chalmers) and 6'2" guards (RR) could handle him (or were their heights overstated also?).Similarly, Beasley was supposed to be this great 4 who was 6'10". But he's only 6'8 3/4" in his shoes! Now we know why Michael spent so much time out in 3 point land. The guy was playing D1 center at under 6'9".Neither one of these guys give you any decisive match-up advantage at the 1 or 4 against top tier NBA players at their positions. Beasley could be a really terrific fit for a team with a dominant center. He could fill the role James Worthy did for the Lakers back in the Magic-Kareem days and be the guy who feasts on other teams having to overplay the big guard and big center. But teams drafting in the top 5 do not have dominant centers or big guards. So teams are essentially wasting a draft choice taking Beasley first. He'll make them just good enough not to be a lottery pick for a center, or PG, but he won't make the team into a serious contender.You take Rose high not because he's going to be a dominant PG (he's not), but because he will be an adequate one for 5-8 years, because he's young, and might grow some more (doubtful, but he might). He nails down the PG slot, while you figure out how to land 2-3 match up advantage players for him to feed. You do it via trades (e.g., Kevin Garnett) and the draft (e.g., Tim Duncan), while your team still sucks. Your record probably doesn't improve at all with Rose until you land the big match-up advantage players show, but its easier to find those next, than picking the great match-up advantage types first and then having to make do with sloppy seconds PGs later. The only exception to this rule is if you can jump on a great center immediately. Great centers remain the scarcest commodity of all in NBA hoops.Chicago HAS to take Rose first. Rose at PG with Hinrich at SG is 2/5s of a championship team, yet playing them together will not make them enough better to keep them from getting high draft choices. Over the next two years, all Chicago has to do is: a) trade 3 or 4 of their existing players [any of their existing bigs] for a top big; and b) pick up a swing man and they are a contender for 5 straight years. And Hinrich will be fairly easy to replace at the two when the need arises. Hinrich would be an exceptional SG and is only a good PG. He has been completely wasted (and way over played) at pg imho. Move Kirk to the SG and he'll create matchup advantages instantly. He'll also kill lazy NBA defenders on the fast break. You can bet Danny Ainge would take Hinrich in a Boston minute.

June 22, 2008 at 6:15 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

LAJayhawk (anonymous) says...

jaybate-If the Bulls take Rose, I'm fairly certain they will trade Hinrich immediately in a package deal. I would love for him to move to shooting guard because I love watching him in Chicago. But I'm about 90% sure the Bulls won't use him that way, and will unload him while his worth is still pretty high.Then again, as I said before, I'm far from an NBA expert.

June 22, 2008 at 7:21 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

actorman (anonymous) says...

"Every available Jayhawk will out-work their peers."That's not biased or anything, is it?With Chalmers I agree. It's possible with Rush (despite his occasional lack of aggressiveness). But I don't know why you would say that about Arthur. We've all seen Arthur be lackadaisical from time to time and wished he could be more consistently aggressive. There's no reason to believe that's going to change.

June 22, 2008 at 11 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

garybedore (Gary Bedore) says...

Hey doolin, where you been? Good to see your name.Folks, if I'm the Bulls I take Beasley.Is Rose going to have a better career than Mayo?I think those 3 have to go 1-2-3.Lopez is good but to go No. 3? Dumb.

June 23, 2008 at 12:10 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

100 (anonymous) says...

Chalmers is taking a huge risk -- let's hope it pays off -- he's being projected at number 27 by most, some don't even have him in the first round. I guess its too late to turn back now. Best of luck, Mario, no matter where you're chosen. We'll always welcome you back with open arms, just like James Naismith, Danny Manning and Wilt Chamberlain, in Lawrence.

June 23, 2008 at 12:59 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

justanotherfan (anonymous) says...

Rose didn't dominate KU, but let's recall his three previous games against big time back courts...Michigan State - So embarassed Drew Neitzel and the Spartans that it made me wonder whether they should have even made the tournament.Texas - Outran and outmuscled DJ Augustin. Showed that when he is matched up with a smaller player he will physically impose his will, regardless of skill level. UCLA - Destroyed Darren Collison so badly that he sent him back to UCLA for a year. Westbrook faired better, but it was clear that Rose won the day. Then you consider that Rose was, for most of the year, one of the best two players on the national runner up. I'd say that makes him a 1 or 2 pick. I think he will be a big time guard in the NBA. His strength and athleticism make him a tough cover, especially in the NBA, where he will have more one on one matchups than he saw in college.As for Beasley, lets remember that he did lead an inferior team to victory over us, and he did go crazy in the Fieldhouse (even though his team couldn't keep up).Recall that we have at least three big guys that will all be compensated to play basketball next year somewhere if they choose (Kaun in Russia, Jackson either in the D League or Europe if he doesn't stick after the Vegas league, and Arthur in the NBA). Then remember that this is who Beasley went for a double double against TWICE. Scored nearly 40 in the Fieldhouse! That's what Durant did, except Durant never did beat us.

June 23, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

KEITHMILES05 (anonymous) says...

All round most athletic and talented is Beasley; hands down.

June 23, 2008 at 9:53 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

milehighhawker (anonymous) says...

justanotherfan....excellent breakdown. Anybody who doesn't think Rose is and will be a player doesn't know their *** from their appetite. Kid can ball, and did it on the biggest stages.However, Beasley is one of a kind. Not only did he take his team who hadn't reached the tournament in I don't know how many years to the dance, but to the second round. all by himself!!! The guy is a double double machine. If I'm the Bulls, does it sound better to have a guy who will get 20pts & 10rebs to go with a point who will get 15pt & 6a or would you rather have a point go for 15pt & 8a and a 2 go for 15pts & 6 a? Which is going to win you more games. It all depends on who they get in a trade deal, but my opinion is stick with what you have at guard, add Beasley and his 20 & 10 which opens up the perimeter for 3's and make a few additions through the draft and trades. How good would Kaun look next to Beasley in a few years???? They could get him in the 2nd or 3rd round.

June 23, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. ( | suggest removal )

JayCeph (anonymous) says...

justanother... great post! Nice perspective and remarkably analytical.Good read. Keep up the good work~

June 23, 2008 at 2:49 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

actorman (anonymous) says...

"How good would Kaun look next to Beasley in a few years???? They could get him in the 2nd or 3rd round."A nice thought, but unfortunately there is no third round.

June 23, 2008 at 4:08 p.m. ( | suggest removal )