At this point, it's a flattering comparison for the 20 year old Rose. He is incredibly gifted athletically and looks like a great choice to build around, but 24 year old Brandon is on a different level. btw... heres a reminder of how the home and home went this year http://www.nba.com/games/20090112/PORCHI/boxscore.html http://www.nba.com/games/20081119/CHIPOR/boxscore.html STOMP
1st and 10 guys this morning said roy was a superstar in the tier immediately below the big 3 (lebron, kobe, wade). but they said he'd never be in that top 3 level, he could still be a hall of famer. rose is a great young pg as well, but he's not a top 5 pg yet (paul, williams, nash, tony parker, chauncy billups), while roy is a top 5 sg (kobe, wade...and that's probably it since lebron is a SF). not saying that rose won't get there, but he's not there yet. in the end, for the future, you go roy over rose because we know he's got one thing that rose doesn't, clutch.
Both players are franchise-cornerstone type players. You can't go wrong with either but Brandon has already proven himself to be a top-tier player in this league, no question.
Um, because Roy is still only 24. And arguably a top 5-10 player in the league. That is guaranteed, money in the bank. The only reason to take Rose is if you HOPE he will be a top 3 player in the league. The odds of which, are small. It really comes down to the odds that each will be a top 5 player by the time they are, say, 28 years old. Considering Roy is basically there, the odds are much higher that he will make it.
You guys do realize that Roy is a point guard as well as a shooting guard. This whole "PG's are so desireable" bologna is sickening. Name me Point Guards who have been the FOCAL point of their teams success that lead to titles outside of Thomas and Magic? And that was over 2 decades ago. Stockton? NOPE Kidd?NOPE Nash?NOPE Kevin Johnson?NOPE Tim Hardaway?NOPE Penny Hardaway?NOPE Tony Parker is debatable, but he also had Manu and Tim and one of the greatest coaches of all-time. It was more evident with Magic and Isiah that they were HANDS DOWN the best player on their squad. Roy plays point when it matters most. All you need your point to do is play D, hit open shots, and don't force turnovers. Bigs and elite wings dominate the playoffs. Rose is going to be a top 3 PG, but Roy is the total package and is simply better. The think the whole "elite pg" view here is overrated. You really just need a serviceable dude in there like Fisher, Armstrong (BJ), Kenny Smith, etc.
Do you seriously ignore people who disagree with you? It's not like he was even stating it in an inflammatory way. I disagree with him, but I do think it's a fairly difficult choice. Do you take the sure thing, or the potential (who has already shown quite a bit)? I personally lean towards the sure thing. I think it's fairly irrelevant. Either team would be stupid to trade them as both appear to be franchise cornerstone types.
I see Rose's upside as Deron Williams caliber, which means that there's no difficulty to this question for me. Rose's ceiling is where Roy is now...in the 5-10 range, league-wide. If I thought Rose could be as good as Chris Paul (who I'd put in the top 4), then it might be a tougher question. But I don't think Rose is anywhere close to the talent of Paul. I think Rose's likeliest case is Tony Parker. Tremendous player, but not better than Roy is now.
I wonder if Blazer fans are being consistent . . . the rationale I read is you take Roy because he is a proven all star over the "potential" of a Rose. Do the same posters feel the same way about Oden . . . would you take a proven all star center today over Oden?
when it comes to guards, they are a dime a dozen, so you take the proven all-star that has only three years in the league, because odds are, you'll get another good one soon enough. When it comes to centers, they're more rare. So if your vet is on the down hill swing, you take the up and comer w/huge potential. The Roy/Rose thing is stupid, b/c Roy's been in the league, what 3 years? They're both still reaching their potential, and Roy's already an all-star twice now..... Roy wins hands down.
I don't think Roy even made first or second team all NBA . . . it might just be Blazer fans that put him in the superstar category. But why stop at centers when we are making this comparison. Roy is being compared to Rose. How about Oden for Amare. Parker, West. My point is I don't think the argument you go with the already proven commodity is always the answer. Sometimes potenital of a player overcomes that.
There's far, far less competition among centers than among guards, so that's a poor comparison. And Roy is at a disadvantage in terms of proven reputation. In terms of production, only Paul, Wade and Kobe are better than Roy.
It's tough to compare when it's between a 24-year-old B-Roy and 20-year-old Rose. Yao's 28, Shaq has one year left in his career, and Gasol is 29. Greg is only 21.
I agree. My point was that Roy is already at such a high level of production (and has his own upside still) that the chances of Rose's ceiling being above what Roy already is, is tiny. Rose would need to be a top-five player. Possible, but extremely unlikely. I think Rose's ceiling is what Roy currently is (a player in the 5-10 range) so you take the sure thing over the player who may one day get there. Especially considering there isn't a big age difference.
I see where you are coming from . . . I think there are a lot of non-Blazer fans who would dispute your opinion about Rose's ceiling . . . and probably about Roy's current level (5-10 range). But I'm a Blazer fan, so sure . . . I'll put Roy in the top 10 players in the league.
Nope it's just an opinion. It's an eyeball test thing. I watch Brandon play and I say "he's good." Then I watch Rose and I say "he's better."
