Tyrus or Aldridge?

I'd take Aldridge now and I'm about 60% sure I'd take Aldridge in the future, but I don't think it's inconceivable that Tyrus turns out to be the better player in the long run. And Tyrus has come along at a nicer pace than I thought he would at this time last season when he basically looked like he'd never played basketball before.</p>

</p>

I really like both players. I suspect we took the wrong guy, but think we're going to be happy with Tyrus anyway. I don't see it being a Bowie over Jordan or Traylor for Dirk kind of mistake.</p>

 

I'd love to have Aldridge and Noah. 2 athletic, versatile, mobile 7 footers would be ideal.</p>

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane)</div><div class='quotemain'></p>

I think I'd take Aldridge, too. Simply because Thomas is looking like a hybrid 3/4 which doesn't really help the Bulls given they have Deng at the 3, and need a true PF at the 4. We saw Thomas, in his "career game," try to defend an actual PF and he simply got posted up and outmuscled all game until Sheed tired himself out. I don't think it's going to matter if Thomas puts one 30 lbs of muscle as that might hurt his athleticism overall.</p>

</div></p>

I'll be the first to criticize his man defense, in fact I did in the other thread, but there are a few mitigating factors that you're not mentioning. Rasheed is one of the toughest covers in the league. If he wasn't so unselfish he would have higher scoring games more often. His point total that night was the direct outcome of a successful Bulls strategy that led to a win. Skiles said after the game that they decided to not double or help out on Rasheed - Tyrus was completely iso-ed. So Rasheed had a great game but it came at the expense of other Pistons like McDyess and Prince, who never got involved in the offense and played worse as a result. And as far as Rasheed only missing his shots at the end due to tiring out -- perhaps we should give Tyrus credit for tiring Rasheed out with his tenacious D </p>

Aldridge and Tyrus are probably going to be equally valuable as defenders - Aldridge won't get as many blocks or steals or rebounds, but he's going to alter more shots and be more versatile because of his height. So the more relevant question to me is whether Tyrus can match Aldridge on offense. I don't think he will... though those baby hooks and no look lay-ups sure looked nice on Thursday night.</p>

</p>

</p>

</p>

 

I think Aldridge fills the bulls need, but I think ultimately Thomas will be the better player in the league. Also, that heart problem Aldridge had would concern me. I think it might be better to judge who's the better player 2-3 years down the line</p>

 

Alridge is a much better scorer from inside and has a nice J and I highly emphasise his nice J after seeing him drop 30 on San Antonio on opening night. Thomas is a great player but I disagree with anyone who thinks hes be a better player than Aldridge now or in the future. Also considering Bulls seem to be lacking an inside presence on offense it would seem that they should have taken Aldridge.</p>

 

Aldridge has been much better than I thought he'd be. I read up on him before the draft and thought, man, this guy is soft. Well, he's not soft, thought his defense doesn't look at that great at this point either. Still, he's capable and he's a 4/5. He's filling it up and really plays a big-man's game.</p>

Thomas is a 3/4, and his progress, especially this year, has me thinking he's veering more toward the 3. He's a stringbean who can't hold position all that well, and if you watch him, he's actually yearning to bring all of those perimeter skills out. He <u>wants</u> to be able to face up and score, to pass the ball, to take guys off the dribble. And he clearly loves being a high-flyer. So when I see where he's going, I love it in the absolute sense... he's becoming very good. In the context of where the Bulls are going... I'm not too sure how that works with Deng and Noc.</p>

And if it doesn't work for us, Aldridge was the guy to have, because he'd be quite a help.</p>