Worst. Draft. Ever.

The jokes for this draft write themselves. I mean seriously, do I really need to try to make up something funny, when this dastardly basketball killer to your right from UIPUI was picked in the first round? It's as if roughly after the lottery, every GM had a stroke at the same time, and let their kids pick people whose "name sounded funny". It was a contest of one-uppery of retardation one pick after another well into the night. Half the people picked in the first round were second round talent.

And let me say this: for a while there I thought Darrell Arthur was going to be taught to drive a truck by his mom for the rest of his life. Ma and Son trucking would really take off then. I feel bad for the possibility of having serious health condition, but other than, it was uncomfortably entertaining to see his discomfort.

As a Cavs fan, with so many players still on the board, when they picked JJ Hickson I had no reaction. I wasn't upset. I wasn't happy. I was caught so far off guard by this ridiculous pick that I just stared at my television. No matter how you spin it, it was just not a great pick.

My favorite part had to come with the 26th pick, when Accountant/Basketball player George Hill was selected. I watch 500 college basketball games a year, and not once have I heard his name called. And I'm possitive that David Stern snickered a little when he said, "George is not here."

There's so much to talk about within these draft picks, that it would take all day to go over. But the most insteresting has to be Detroit's 2nd round draft pick Walter Sharpe. Let's get this out of the way: who the fuck is this guy. DSC's a big fan. Free Press finds some information about your local sports hero:

I'll fill you in on a few details: Yes, he really has struggled with narcolepsy. He was academically ineligible last semester, presumably for spelling "Sharp" wrong. And maybe the best sign that he is ready for pro sports is that he already has his first nightclub arrest under his belt.

You say what now? He's narcoleptic? That doesn't stop him from getting arrested apparently. This guy should love Det-riot. Yeah, I would assume that narcolepsy would make it difficult to concentrate in school. But maybe, and I'm just spit balling here, it might also make it difficult to play basketball. Undeterred Pistons. Good thing they didn't take local undefeated basketball superstar CDR. That would have been foolish, and not at all fan-friendly.

I woke up this morning, hoping that last night was a big joke. Unfortunately, I still have JJ Hickson for next year.

[FreeP] Don't assume Pistons blew the draft

Rose v Beasley

This NBA draft is centered around two players that have switched more places than there have been Mock Drafts. Derrick Rose and Michael Beasley have generated more fanfare than even Oden-Durant debates a mere year ago. So, who's better? Who's got more upside? Which team will choose who?

Derrick Rose - The quintessential offensive minded, yet mentally collaborative and athletic point guard needed for today's NBA. To say that he led his team to the NBA finals would be a bit of a stretch, seeing how that team had other extremely good players, but when a basket needed to be made it was CDR only marginally ahead of Rose in line to get the ball. Athletically, he's as gifted as any guard that's ever entered the NBA. He has tremendous size for a point guard, incredible jumping ability, and an even more amazing amount of body control to contort himself for baskets in traffic. I can go on and on about his abilities, but I think the best example was his extremely efficient carving session of Michigan State in the NCAA tournament. He does a great job handling the ball, and there's no limit for how fast he can force the game at.

Michael Beasley - What's not to like about his floor game? Nearly nothing. His athleticism pushed KSU to something they haven't done in some 20 years. But it's not just that, it's the total package of his inside-out game, and his aggressive yet feathery touch around the basket. He wants the ball, he demands the ball when his team needs it, but seemingly does not force something that isn't there, and passes well out of double teams. He can move all the way to the three-point line, and he has a variety of post moves under the basket. Here's a guy you can build around, even if he's got the Tracy-McGrady-I'm-high stare.

The order of these two was relatively known until the NCAA tournament, where Derrick Rose was able to lengthen his audition all the way to the title game. The unanomous #1 pick was now split into two camps. But anyone who believes it wasn't cemented on Lottery Night is a fool. Chicago is picking Rose. It's not like they have to take a longshot and be nice to a homegrown kid. You've got a future star right there for you - and not like they need to put asses into seats - but he's also got great PR written all over him. In that sense, he's in the mold of LBJ.

It's a mystery to me why Miami is so in love with Rose that they reportedly want to trade out of the #2 spot because they aren't going to get him. Beasley fits flawlessly into the front-court. Moreover, Wade is a point guard; sure you can shift him over to the 2, but why get another player who does exactly the same thing. Even if they were first, conventional wisdom would have Beasley as their pick.

More and more history tells us that in the NBA draft, you get the best player available, because when you draft for need you get Bowie over Michael Jordan, and Darko over 'Melo. Chicago has some three point guards on the roster right now, and none of them can hold Rose's jock strap and he hasn't even played an NBA game yet. I still think that Beasley is the better overall player, but much like his end to the season, we're left with that as the lasting memory of him not being able to get over the hump.

But, who can pass up on a young athletic point guard? Just Atlanta.

Please, not Roy Hibbert

As a fervent fan of my almost-home town NBA franchise, I often check what other people think is going to happen in the upcoming draft. Speaking of which, is it just me, or has this draft been the most unpredictable in recent memory? It went from knowing the first pick, to knowing the first 2 picks, to not knowing what the hell is going to happen 1-10. There are just so many options, it's like a carnival game of popping balloons with darts. We'll look over the top 10 picks later, but I want to speak specifically of the 19th pick in Chad Ford's Mock Draft 6.0. Cleveland picks... Roy Hibbert. Uh, what? For the life of me, I can't understand why the Cavs - or anyone - would pick Roy Hibbert to play for them.

I guess, he's tall. And you can't teach tall!

First of all, from the Cavaliers side, they don't need some sluggish clone of Zydrunas Ilgauskas. I thought the whole idea, was to get an athletic scoring center. Okay, even a slightly unathletic one, I said scoring, right?

Second of all, from a league perspective, this guy is a terrible prospect. He's got tall, and he's somewhat efficient, and unspectacular, on both the defensive and offensive ends of the floor. But here's my biggest issues with him: 6.4 rebounds a game. That's right, this guy is seven feet tall and he's only managed to average 6.4 rebounds per game. I can't even understand how that works. How can he not average nearly 10 rebounds per game. I mean, he's taller than everyone on the floor. He's also bigger, so they can't get around him. I'm puzzled, perplexed, and confused.

That really has to be disconcerting for teams. That the one thing he should be able to do because of his unteachable quality he can't do all that well. In fact, what's really scary is that he only got double-figured rebounds five times all year, against such stalwarts as ODU (10), Depaul (11), Pittsburgh (10), and West Virginia twice (10, 13). What's more? He got 3 or less rebounds seven (!!) times. That's inexcusable no matter how you slice it.

Alright, so his rebounding is apparently not that great, but apparently neither is his work ethic, and personal basketball growth:

SEASON	MIN	PTS	REB	STL	BLK	PF	FG%	FT%
2004-2005	15.8	5.1	3.5	.3	1.3	2.3	.469	.662
2005-2006	24.0	11.6	6.9	.2	1.6	2.1	.590	.723
2006-2007	26.4	12.9	6.9	.5	2.4	2.8	.671	.686
2007-2008	26.3	13.4	6.4	.5	2.2	2.7	.609	.646

Throughout his career, Roy Hibbert has clearly been an average player at best, but why did he not get more than marginally better in his last 3 years? The jump from his freshman to his sophomore season is encouraging, he doubled just about every significant category; increased his free-throw and field-goal percentage, as well as points, and rebounds. But from then on he managed just under 2 points a game more and half a rebound less. His senior campaign by far was the most discouraging because his shooting, blocks, and rebounds all suffered while his offensive output was microscopically larger with nearly identical playing time.

I don't think he was any good at Georgetown. I don't think he'll be any good in the Pros, and I don't want him on my team.