Reasons for Optimism:
1. DWade's return to health and aggressive play in Beijing.
2. ESPN's John Hollinger's statistical analysis of Beasley and Chalmers:
-------------------
The Sure Thing: Michael Beasley, Kansas State, 19.31
Beasley's rating is the highest of any player going back to 2002, and it's the best by a pretty sizable margin. Obviously, this isn't new information -- nobody doubts this guy's talent level.
But he might be even better than people realize. His numbers were superior even to Kevin Durant's from a year ago, and Durant had everyone gaga over his performance as a college freshman.
Somehow Beasley didn't resonate quite as strongly, perhaps because of concerns over his character, but if he keeps his head on straight he's going to be insanely good.
--------------------
D.J. Augustin, Texas (14.88); Derrick Rose, Memphis (14.69); Mario Chalmers, Kansas (14.03); Jerryd Bayless, Arizona (14.03).
Surprisingly, nobody rates as a slam-dunk lottery pick, not even Derrick Rose. In fact, Rose came in only second here, partly because he had such a slow start to his freshman season before picking up steam at the end.
Is this enough reason to draft Augustin ahead of Rose? No, because the margin between them is miniscule, and even if their career PERs end up the same, Rose will have far more defensive value given his superior size.
The bigger question is whether a team can justify taking Rose ahead of Michael Beasley, whose 19.19 is the best mark by anyone in the six years for which I have data. Yes, Beasley appears to be a space cadet and that's troubling, but what these numbers say to me is that the talent disparity is simply too big. That is, unless Beasley is such a train wreck off the court that he sabotages his own career, he's probably going to have much better results than Rose. In fact, you can make a strong case that Kevin Love should rank ahead of Rose on draft boards, as well.
Here's another interesting fact: Rose rated slightly higher as a wing (15.34) than as a point guard. That seems crazy, but he has the size to play the 2 if he has to. Just humor me and store that in the recesses of your brain in case you need to access it in a few years.
Finally, it's notable that Chalmers, though widely presumed to be a fringe first-rounder, rates even with Bayless and pretty close to Rose and Augustin.
----------------------
3. New voice in the locker room.
4. Post-Shaq spirit.
5. Flexibility to make a deal using Marion's expiring contract.
Reasons for Pessimism:
1. Significant lack of depth. There are three proven NBA starters on the roster: Wade, Marion, and Haslem. There is one proven NBA role player on the roster: James Jones. If I stipulate that Beasley will instantly be a reasonably productive NBA player, that is still only five legitimate NBA players at this juncture. Can I give you Mark Blount? I think I can not give you Mark Blount.
2. Of those five, three are most ideally suited for the same power forward position.
3. Of those five, one - Mike Beasley - seems loose. Very, very loose.
4. There is not a legitimate NBA point guard on the roster. You may pray that Chalmers becomes one, someday.
5. There is no one who can defend the rim.
In other news:
Recently heard Randy, the cowboy from The Village People, on the Howard Stern Show. While for decades I have always assumed that the group was The Village People - that is, a group of people from the Village - it was clear from Randy's pronounciation that the group is actually called The Village People, as if there are other distinct entities from the Village to which you might reasonably be referring - this group here refers to the people from the Village, not to one of those other entities. A subtle distinction, but, I think, an important one.
