Coming out week for Kyrie Irving
For the average basketball fan, Kyrie Irving was a young draft pick from a couple of seasons ago. He was somewhat forgotten and hasn't been headlined for quite a while. Hardly playing at Duke and playing for the Cleveland Cavaliers never helped his celebrity status but after this week, I expect Kyrie Irving to be a household name.
Started off on Friday by putting Brandon Knight on skates and dominating the Rookie Showcase with nifty moves and highlight dribbles.
Saturday, he went on to win the 3-pt shootout.
Sunday, he held his own in the All-Star game and was on the floor towards the end of the game. As the old saying goes, good players start the game, the best players end the game.
Wednesday, he drops 35pts, 7asts, 5rebs, including 20 points in the 4th quarter as he carried the Cavaliers to a W on national television, ESPN.
Aside from LeBron James and trade scenarios, has anybody else been trending as much as Kyrie Irving this week?
Best handles since Allen Iverson?
If you had a choice of Derrick Rose or Kyrie Irving on your team for the next 10-12 years, who would you take?
Kyrie has elite handles no question about it.He is in the CP3 category and it's only his second season so the sky is the limit for him.What i want to see out of Kyrie is leadership skills as he and the young Cavs get more experienced in the NBA.I also believ that Byron Scott deserves a lot of credit for this young man turning out to be a superstar
Now between Rose and Kyrie it's a tough one.If Rose hadn't torn his acl i would probably go with him cause he is an established leader and a former MVP who's led the Bulls in the playoffs tons of times.If you ask the same question a year from now and Rose is playing like he used to play i would probably still go with Rose but right now i might have to go with Kyrie
D. Rose win a lot of games and Irving has not up to this point. Irving may prove be more than just a stat player as Clevelands talent improves but at this point I would go with Rose every time.
No disrespect to D Rose but look how good his team is without him AND after getting rid of most of their bench. Chicago put a great team around him and found him an amazing coach. And this Cavs team might be the worst in the league if you replace Irving with an average point guard. As far as impact on wins I'd say they're even. Injury concerns are roughly even too, who knows how Rose's surgery will impact his game and Irving has had his fair share of nagging injuries. I think its a toss up
Derrick Rose was MVP two years ago. The Bulls were 50-16 last year and 62-20 the year before. They won over 75 % of their games over that span. They are playing 58% percent ball this year without Rose. The things you said about the defense and coaching are correct but you are still discounting the effect Rose has on this team.
Cleveland is playing 31% ball since Kyrie entered the league. I know he has been hurt and has a poor supporting cast but they are cellar dwellers. Kyrie can play no doubt about it. He is possibly the best scoring PG in the league right now but he isn't Derrick Rose...not yet.
Nah, the Bulls are still a playoff team without D.Rose true.....but they went from winning the East 2 years in a row with an combined record of 112-36, to being in 5th place in the East and losing 22 games already without him....D.Rose is a huge factor to the Bulls success, as evident when they got smacked in the playoffs last year when he went down.
Bulls also lost Asik and Korver in this last off season. That is also hurting them. So it isn't just Rose not being there. D. Rose is good but if the Bulls had kept Asik and Korver they would have been able to keep winning in the regular season at a higher pace. D. Rose's importance is greater in the playoffs.
Not ready to take Kyrie yet, but how terrible would the cavs be without him? Rose team has still shown they can beat the best without him. Of course they are a better team with Rosé. Kyrie had to come in and be the savior from day one. Rose was not the best on his team his first year, Ben Gordon was. Rose came to a team that was a playoff team with or without, so to compare their success as far as wins is unfair.
As a Bulls' fan I'd take Kyrie going forward. He's already more skilled than Derrick. Kyrie just has a more skilled, imaginative game with an innate ability to see all the angles and score from every spot on the floor. I think he'd be just as productive in Derrick's situation, the team defense would still be there and the Bulls would have a better closer. Kyrie's already one of the best closers in the game.
Rose is a pretty damn good closer in his own right.
He's good as a closer (FTs have been a problem for him in the clutch though). Kyrie is great as a closer. IMO, Kyrie is harder to guard because he can score from every level of the floor and teams can't just play him a certain way. Even if Derrick has improved his J, teams can still back off, go under screens and give him the jumper. Kyrie's just the more clever player who has the skill to take whatever the defense gives him.
Derrick Rose is a former MVP. I'll give him a chance to return and work his way back to top form before I make that decision.
If Adrian Peterson can come back and rush for over 2000 yds I'm pretty certain D. Rose will be back as good as ever with as driven as he is.
For the record... There may be point guards out there with similar skill sets as Rose, but you can't possibly say at this time K. Irving is one of them since he has lost most of the games in which he has played in. Winning is one important piece of the skill set that Irving does not possess.
Please. Winning is a function of team. Kyrie's best teammate this yr was Varejao and he's missed most of the season. Outside of that, look who they're starting. A bunch of first and 2nd yr players and an undrafted journeyman. Expecting him to win with that team is stupid to say the least.
"Winning is one important piece of the skill set that Irving does not possess."
I can't believe so many of you guys believe this...the Cavs are NOT trying to win this season...
Kyrie came to the worst team in the league when he was drafted. Derrick Rose did not...Chicago was a couple wins away from making the playoffs the year before he came.
Nothing against Derrick Rose. But just the fact that people are saying that the fact that Kyrie doesn't win enough is stupid.
They're in year two of rebuilding after completely destroying their team after the best player in the world left their city. They're only serviceable player after Lebron left was Anderson Varejao and he's hardly played.
And yet Kyrie still finds a way to win some tough games because he is so clutch.
The 2008 Bulls were 33-49. They were 4 games from making the playoffs only because the East was soo bad (and still is). The only reason they were a "couple" games out was because Atlanta made the playoffs with 37 wins. The Charlotte Bobcats won 32 games that year so it wasn't like Chicago was any good. They weren't as bad as Cleveland after Lebron but they were still pretty poor.
If we are going to look at a PG who was in a situation similar to Irving it would be Chris Paul coming in as a rookie. They won 18 games before they got him. The next two years they won 38 and 39 games in a loaded western conference. By his 4th year they won 56 games which was one game behind the Lakers and even with the Spurs. Paul made his team better and they won...he didn't have tons of help. They had West in his prime scorning 20 a game, Peja scoring 16 and Chandler in the middle before he was an all star caliber center. They had no other back court scoring. They had an aging Bobby Jackson and Bonzi Wells and Mo Pete coming off the bench.
Kyrie is very young and clearly has all the talent in the world. The facts are he hasn't done much in the NBA outside of scoring on a bad team. He has looked great and I expect him to be in the conversation for best PG in the league down the road. He isn't in that conversation yet....Rose clearly is as his MVP award will show you. Parker and Paul are the best right now...until Kyrie takes his team to the playoffs and beyond he will just be a really good player on a bad team.
Guys, lets remember something, KYRIE IS ONLY 20 YEARS OLD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! He's turning into a bonafide Superstar so young, it's crazy. Now with that being said D-Rose is no slouch either and he's proved he can lead a team to W's so I'd take him right now but think about it, Kyrie has 10 years of ball left in his 20s, it's unbelievable how good he is and how good he can be.
Winning is more than just a function of team and that's why the Lebrons of the league receive the majority of the salary cap.
Many players can not excel in the 4th quarter during crunch time when pressure is applied and that has a lot to do with won/loss records. It does a team no good to fill up a stat sheet if there are no victories.
It is mostly team. Again, 2 rookies, 2 2nd yr players and an undrafted journeyman as the starting lineup, with the 2nd best player on the team ( a high energy guy) being injured for the majority of the season. What did people expect this Cavs team to do?
And Kyrie excels in the 4th quarter. It's being in the position to win the the game in the 4th quarter that's the problem.
Where has Irving won and at what level? It's nothing personal against Irving... it's the same standard applied to Kevin Love.
Irving has barely played more than 82 games in his NBA career...the Cavs are not trying to win. They were not trying to get to the playoffs this year.
Have you seen the Cavs team? Do you really think a 20 year old Derrick Rose would be winning more than Kyrie right now?
You are missing the point completely... HE HAS NEVER WON! The NBA is about winning games and championships. Not putting up stats on bad teams.
You are what your record is whether you win 15 games or 60 games that is what you are.
On bad teams someone has to score... that's what Irving is until he wins games. It does not matter whether you think they are trying to win or not... if they were capable of being good they would try to win.
No, you are missing the point. Kyrie's team sucks. They don't have the talent or experience. They have THE youngest current starting lineup in the league.
Kyrie Irving shares responsibility for the Cavs sucking because he is part of the team little fella.
Little fella? Condescension doesn't make your point any more valid.
Most #1 overall picks go to shtty teams and it takes a few yrs to turn it around. Kyrie's situation is no different.
Derrick's was because they were a team that just missed the playoffs and had been in the playoffs with basically the same core for the previous yrs before his arrival.
Seriously, what do YOU expect a team with the roster that the Cavs have to do?
Did KD not have the skill to win when his team was garbage his first few yrs?
Does Harrison Barnes have more skill to win than Anthony Davis or MKG?
Hey, Blake Griffin wasn't enough of a winner...but then he magically developed that skill once CP3 arrived, right?
I don't think you chose the best examples. Blake Griffin did seem like an empty stats guy that was good but didn't have a huge impact on winning, KD as a rookie at least wasn't good enough to lift OKC and I could definitely argue Barnes over MKG. I'm not saying I disagree with your premise that the Cavs suck and that's not on Kyrie, but your examples weren't too good.
You are arguing about what? When you win you are a winner... when you lose 68 1/2 % of your games you not a winner until you win.
It's how it is... not my rules. I like Irving as a player... but until he wins he is no different than Stephon Marbury. It's unfortunate that he's on a bad team... but he's a large part of that bad team.
Why do suppose most of the highest regarded players come from winning programs and not just select the players the best stat lines? Do you think maybe it's because a winning player is valued over a players that accumulates stats for lesser teams? The Marshon Brooks othe draft usually go in the 2nd round while the Ben McLemores are selected a top of the draft even though they only score 1/2 of the points as the others because they find ways of winning games.
I'm arguing that I would take Irving going forward because I think he is already the more skilled player and will be the better basketball player going forward. And like I said, I'm a Bulls fan. I'd rather compare abilities. It ain't like Kyrie's a dumb player putting up stats strictly off of raw physical talent and aggressiveness. He's already an elite player in the 4th quarter and clutch moments. He's off the charts skilled, smart, knows how to manipulate the defense and makes winning plays.
You're downgrading a player because of his circumstance. Swap 2nd yr Derrick Rose and put him in Kyrie's current situation and you'd think Derrick's another Marbury as well.
14 yrs old huh? Kwame Brown is old school to you? Keep negging... I couldn't care less.
I know how this game works. I also know that when someone doesn't add much to their weak argument they resort to name calling or condescension.
The true measure of a point guard is if he makes the players around him better.... and no he doest. He averages 5 assists per game for his team and his team isn't improving. Arguement .... I just know Irving isn't a winning player at this point, check their record. It's a fact that can't be argued.
Rose' rookie season ast rate = 28.8%
Irving's rookie season ast rate = 36.5%
Rose' ast rate his 2nd yr = 30.3%
Irving's ast rate this yr = 31%
If that's all you have you might wanna try again.
"Arguement"...I just know Irving is not in a winning situation at this point, check the Cav's roster. It's a fact that can't be argued.
Your mind has to be plenty used to your stupidity by now.
okay let's see it if i would choose one sorry DRose your one of my favorite, but i would say Irving he is far more Skilled than Rose
FG%, 3pt% and FT%- Irving
Clutch- Irving, Rose ft on clutch situations is a little bit shaky
Passing- Surprise surprise Rose(6,8) ast% 33.8 Irving 33.7 Rose, Rose is better opening space to
assist by using is speed
Physical/Size- Rose, i actually think Rose has the tools to evolve, but i still think Irving he is a better player to pick not because of Athleticism because he have another tools to be a good player for long years i don't actually like players that rely to much on Athleticism
Ball Handling- Rose, Irving is more imaginative with the ball but commits more TO than Rose, Rose's Crossover is sweet and Rose too
Where are the folks that back at the 2011 draft were saying Kemba and Knight were going to be better than Irving? I remember getting killed in some of the comments when I said Irving was in a completely different class than those guys.
I got him on my non-deadly fantasy team and he is killing it for me. Last time I get him outside of the first round for a while I suspect. The secret is out. Oh well, time to find another steal. I wonder if folks will have forgotten about Love by the time we do fantasy drafts next year?
I think people on here have severely overrated Rose's teammates due to their regular season success this year. Yes, they are a great defensive unit, and yes Thibs is a good coach. But Rose has made the playoffs every year of his career, and lead his team to the No.1 seed two years in the row. In the playoffs, he is basically his team's only player and is the only guy on the team who can create off the bounce. He still was able to get his team to the conference finals, where he ran into a red-hot shooting series from LeBron and a good Heat team. Last year, the Bulls looked great in game 1 with Rose, and then totally fell apart against a mediocre 76ers team.
I love Kyrie, I love that he is being appreciated, I love everthing about his game and can't wait to see what comes next. Fact is, right now he is a dude putting up stats on a bad team. Let's not put him ahead of Rose quite yet. But I am willing to give Rose an innocent til proven guilty break with the injury. Everyone is giving him and asterisk going forward, but how bout we see if he can come back 100% like some other athletes can first.