| . |
 |
Have read a lot of stuff on the kid and done a lot of evaluation myself.
I found this to be one of the fairest pieces I have read on who he is as a player and what he projects to be. Objectively looks at the good and the bad. Thought I would share.
http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-tr...couting-report
@mcnamara247
Contributor
Chris Paul could finish at the rim.....handle and pass off either hand...quicks in the cross over with bigtime seperation....open floor speed and change of pace....excellent vision....can pass off the DRIBBLE with either hand.....excellent in the pick and roll......playmaker and has the personality to direct a team....shoot the ball....handles traps...heart of a Lion.....can defend....fearless.......Originally Posted by MichaelMcNamara
Just a few notes about Paul as some have asked if he's as good as Paul...he's not......Paul did that stuff as a rookie...
1-What does not move is dead.What has speed,and mobilty has more possibilities,more life...quickness creates luck.
2- Your Defense is only as good as your HELP/ROTATING defenders.
3-Games are won while the ball is in the air.
4- You design your roster to win a 7 game series not a one game confrontation.
I think Jennings is a very fair comparable. One nice thing is the blurb about his catch and shoot rate - that he could be such an effective shooter off the ball bodes well for his ability to play with Gordon, at least on the offensive end.
This is perhaps the weirdest post ever. What are you trying to get at and how does that relate to the article, Gerry?
The Paul comparisons have been discussed ad nauseum on here and they are vague comparisons at that. I don't think anyone is expecting Burke to come in and be Chris Paul, and if they are they are not a very good student of the game anyway. He's an upgrade to Vasquez and a good piece of a rebuilding team.
Wherehappens.
I noticed that too. It was one of the biggest positives of the article. I can't count how many times the ball got passed back to Vasquez and he turned down the shot. Burke won't, for better or for worse.
Contributor
The Paul-Burke comparisons have always been funny. Aside from them both being undersized and wearing #3 they really aren't comparable.
The Hornets need more shooting, especially with our team being so pick and roll reliant. He'd be a big help in that respect.
Paul did not defend well early in his career. Chris separation stemmed more from his ball handling than blinding quickness. No doubt Paul is the better pro prospect. I fell Burke isn't that far behind. I think with Paul it's a lot of hindsight taking place.
The biggest thing those two share as players is that both guys have absurdly low turnover rates for their usage. Burke's is actually better than Paul's was coming out, though Burke played in maybe a friendlier system for that.
Burke's actually a better shooter than Paul was at Wake, but Paul is pretty much impossible to stay in front of and is such a good finisher in the lane. That last part is what likely what would seperates the two as prospects ...easier to correct/improve a shot than to suddenly become elite at finishing inside.
Still, Burke being such a good shooter does bode well. Having both he and Anderson out there, as well as another big with a decent jumper (Davis) would give Gordon a ton of room to operate.
Possibly. Paul WAS passed on for Williams, who had better pro measurables (and when good PGs weren't as plentiful as today). I remember someone posted a comparision of the combine/pre-draft tests between the two and some of those numbers were verysimilar.
I don't think Burke is Chris Paul. However, it is unfair to try and compare them with the benefit of hindsight. Much of that above was not a given when Paul came out of college. Paul had a lot of questions about his size and defense as well. If all of that was a given, he would have gone #1, not #4 (as the second PG taken).
When I saw Brandon Triche blowing by him, I got nervous.
Maybe he can learn how the Spurs do it. They use craftiness and make good rotations to defend. We even saw Boris Diaw allow LeBron only 1 point against him.
This is not a rethorical question:
Can Burke lock down opposint PG's in regards to lateral quickness? IDk and am curious what many of his observers think
I dont think that even the biggest Burke fan will argue he can "lock down" opposing PG's.
I think some go overboard and say he will be a huge liability on D.
My position has always been that he will be a Lillard-ish defender and that would be fine for some teams, but Dell and Monty ideally want someone who can really apply pressure at the point of attack. Think Mike Conley. I can't see Burke doing that.
So who will? Rivers? Jennings or Teague? Yes we're rebuilding but we don't have forever.
And please don't say CJ.
No but there are very few PG's that can lock in on the best PG's. I think worse case he's a decent defender that plays the passing lanes with his length. Best case he's a above average defender that locks in during key defensive moments in the game, and racks up steals similar to what Paul does.
Last edited by da ThRONe; 06-18-2013 at 10:48 AM.
I dont know if that guy is available right now. That doesn't mean you just take someone who doesn't fit your philosophy because they is nobody hanging around at this very minute who fits your ideals.
I think you can take Burke if you can get another guy who can pressure the ball at the point of attack. The Suns were able to hide Nash with Marion. Can Iggy be that guy? Could Gordon? Maybe. Then it's a non issue
Chris Paul couldn't shoot as a rookie. Especially from distance. Even when he got better years later he needed time to set his feet. Paul was strictly 15 in early in his career where Burke is deadly from deep right now.
Other than that, there is no telling what Burke's ceiling is yet but it will not be a Chris Paul clone. He has his own game and he is also a bit bigger/stronger than Paul was as a rookie.
Last edited by luckyman; 06-18-2013 at 11:10 AM.
The article states pretty much that Burke can't be asked to do too much and I think its right. If we use him as a pick and roll point guard who can break down the defense ans hit open shoots, I think he can succeed. Coming to a team like the Pelicans, he won't have as much. He will fail on a team like the Magic, where you need him to score at will. I think a Lowry/Terrell Brandon is a fair comparison. Pretty much he'll fail if the team views him as a transcendent player, but he can succeed in a team first environment.
Charlotte?
Contributor
I have watched more Michigan games this past year than most on this board, I have seen great games by Burke and I have seen the bad ones. I cannot honestly say that I haven't seen any of those things you mentioned this year from Burke. The only one that I think could honestly be questioned is his defense. He does not give 100% effort on defense every play (neither does Paul) but he has the tools to become a decent defender.
I am not trying to compare TB to CP3 or even say that he will be as good as him, but I think for some reason people want to label him has not that good and point out all these holes in this game when most aren't there. Is is a sure fire all-star? No. But he is worth the pick at 6.
Contributor
We can find a PG of his projected caliber in the teens of any normal draft. Heck we found Vazquez off the scrap heap. I want bang for my buck and value for my dollar (same goes for my draft picks). It does not excite me in the least bit...when I hear this guy to compared to Terrell Brandon. That's the definition of 49-51 wins and a first round exit...
How many playoff wins does Chris Paul have?
Don't know how you project anything when we have no clue what the team would look like in the offseason 3 years from now. Other than Davis and likely Rivers.
He is more of a damian lillard or a kemba walker
Terrell Brandon was really good. Unless you see a Wade or Nowitski out there, you pretty much hope to draft a guy like a Brandon. He had nearly a 20 career PER.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote