Beardown wrote:
No Midget. Pax will take Rose.
He should but he'll also do it because it's the safe pick. Rose has the higher floor. The ceilings for these guys might be equal in some people's mind. I'd always error on a guy who can handle the ball and create. Beasley needs somebody to feed him. Most experts think he should take Rose and most Bulls fans want him.
He'll take him. I don't care what his reasons are. If he's in doubt he'll be pressured into taking him. That's why it's the safe pick. Most people say it should be Rose.
Well, gee, if you're predicting the Rose pick, I guess it's a lock not to happen now.
In all seriousness, I hope you're right. But all of the interviews I've heard with Paxson lately suggest that he's really lost touch with his basketball identity. He seems to have entered a totally inchoate mental state that signifies he's doing much more than merely "reevaluating" or productively analyzing his basketball philosophy. Indeed, he now strikes me as a deeply unstable figure, someone who has so radically questioned his approach to the game that he can no longer define precisely what his basketball philosophy is. Perhaps this vulnerable state will lead him, as you suggest, to seek security in the shelter of prevailing public opinion. But I think it is just as likely to make him pursue the chimerical glory of the "big deal" that he has been widely criticized for being unable to complete. Once fortified with the confidence of the zealot, Paxson is now besieged with the doubt of the agnostic. Perhaps Pax's amorphus philosophical state will resolve itself into a more enlightened and more elastic understanding of the game, but I have no confidence in his ability to do so. Even if he makes the right pick, he is the wrong guy to occupy the alpha position in Chicago's NBA franchise.
_________________
Antonio Gramsci wrote:
The crisis consists precisely in the fact that the old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum a great variety of morbid symptoms appear.