Who Wants the Next Pistol Pete? Rubio’s in the Draft
NBA, NBA Draft April 21st. 2009, 11:45am
Spanish point guard Ricky Rubio, who has a penchant for making playground moves look effortless during games that matter, is entering the NBA draft. He’ll probably owe his international team some money, but for an 18-year-old (doesn’t turn 19 until October) who is projected as a top three pick, that’s nothing.
After seeing what Derrick Rose has accomplished in his first season vs. what Michael Beasley has done in Miami … is Blake Griffin still the automatic No. 1 pick over Rubio?
Rose was only 19 when he was drafted. He and Rubio both stand about 6-foot-3, 190-pounds. Rose, an aggressive point guard in the mold of Deron Williams (with a less-reliable jumper), led Memphis within one clutch shot of a National title; Rubio, by all accounts, is a pass-first PG who a few have compared to Pistol Pete Maravich, mostly due to his floppy hair.
Here’s how the three teams with the best shot at the No. 1 pick in the draft stack up:
Sacramento: Could use a point guard (27th in the league in assists), but also an inside factor (29th in rebounding). Rubio and Martin would give the Kings an exciting young Bibby/Peja-like backcourt; Martin-Griffin would give the Kings a potentially strong inside-outside tandem. The Kings did commit to PG Beno Udrih for the next four (probably) years, and they drafted Jason Thompson in the first round last year. Rubio and Griffin are better than both of them. We’d go Griffin.
Washington: Gilbert Arenas just signed a lucrative deal last summer, and he’s got the PG job. The Wiz play Jamison mostly at PF, even though he seems ideally suited for SF. It seems like the move is to draft Griffin first, play him alongside Haywood, and then surround them with gunners – Arenas, Nick Young, Butler and Jamison. The 2nd-worst 3-point shooting team last year will surely surge back into the Top 15 next season.
LA Clippers - With Baron Davis locked into a long-term deal and last year’s first-rounder Eric Gordon putting together a fantastic rookie year (16 ppg), Rubio doesn’t seem like he’d fit. With Zach Randolph hogging the PF minutes, and the presence of Camby and Kaman inside, how much PT could Griffin ear? If the Clippers somehow get the No. 1 pick, you have to assume the team will be busy trading this summer (either Davis or Randolph). The way Dunleavy and Davis have feuded, we think Baron could be on the move. They’ll deal with Randolph’s off-court issues and enormous contract, Griffin’s the pick.
44 Responses to “Who Wants the Next Pistol Pete? Rubio’s in the Draft”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.


April 21st, 2009 at 11:50 am
In theory, I tend to think this is what the Clippers would like to do. But in reality, I can’t think of any team that would be willing to take on Baron’s contract and give back anything of real value.
April 21st, 2009 at 11:53 am
Did this guy play in any internation games this summer? And if he did, how did he do?
April 21st, 2009 at 11:55 am
excited to see this kid in the NBA
April 21st, 2009 at 11:55 am
Maybe I’ve seen him at bad times, but I’m much less impressed with Rubio than others who see more of him are. I need to do some web searching to find some games of him to see why scouts are so high on him.
I see a lot of flash and not much substance, but I’ve been wrong before…
And let’s not do Pistol Pete’s ghost an injustice. There will NEVER be another Pistol. One of a kind.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:00 pm
Wally,
When did you see him?
April 21st, 2009 at 12:03 pm
yeah, they both had floppy hair. great comparison
April 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
NoGuts, his Olympic stats can be found here:
http://www.fiba.com/pages/eng/fe/08/olym/men/teamPlay/play/p/competitioncode//eventid/4004/langid/1/langlc/en/playernumber/53827/roundid/4004/season//teamnumber/362/fe_teamPlay_playStat.html
April 21st, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Pistol was the most overrated player in the history of the game, second only to Iverson.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:05 pm
Agreed but then again he was 17 playing against 23-30 year olds pros.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:05 pm
And let’s not do Pistol Pete’s ghost an injustice. There will NEVER be another Pistol. One of a kind.
Truer words have never been spoken.
Compared to Pistol Pete because of his floppy hair? I’m gonna start comparing Adam Morrison to Larry Bird because they both have a pubic stache.
This sounds like Darko 2.0
April 21st, 2009 at 12:05 pm
I see a lot of flash and not much substance,
a la jason “slim shady” williams?
April 21st, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Heresy.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Compared to Pistol Pete because of his floppy hair?
have you ever watched Rubio play?
April 21st, 2009 at 12:11 pm
He played for the Spanish national team, and was nasty, he was surrounded by some nasty guys, but he was fantastic, can shoot the lights out
April 21st, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Blasphemy. Booze, drugs, a bad father/son relationship and gimpy knees ruined the greatest show the game has ever seen.
Saw Rubio in the Olympics and watched a few of his Euro games online. The Euro game is so much different and he is still a pup playing a man’s game. I’m just not convinced that he has the first step quickness that Parker or Paul or Nash have to be a great lead guard. Solid? Yes. Great? I waffle.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:16 pm
he shot 28% in the Olympics.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:19 pm
i doubt he would fall to the pistons
April 21st, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Compared to Pistol Pete because of his floppy hair?
have you ever watched Rubio play?
no
Ever see Pistol Pete play?
I did. In person
NickP: In your words: epic fail
April 21st, 2009 at 12:28 pm
@Badger – “slim shady” won a ring starting @ pg. diamonds = substance
April 21st, 2009 at 12:30 pm
good call herd, I meant Kings version.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:38 pm
@jpq: Sorry, man. But a guy who couldn’t shoot and turned the ball over a ton is not my idea of an all-time great.
April 21st, 2009 at 12:45 pm
Ever see Pistol Pete play?
just videos. Im not 40+ years old
April 21st, 2009 at 12:49 pm
@jpq: Sorry, man. But a guy who couldn’t shoot and turned the ball over a ton is not my idea of an all-time great.
you’ve basically just described every player in today’s NBA who doesn’t dunk every shot
I never said he was an all time great (though in college he was). I was refuting him being the most over-rated player in history (your words). Watch this video from college, and try to envision that this was a WHITE guy, FORTY YEARS ago, playing like this, and maybe you’ll see why some of us feel the way we do. Picture the clean-cut, Bill Walton-led UCLA teams of that time compared to how he played. He would have killed in today’s game. He was way ahead of his time. All I’m saying. TBL gets hard thinking of Steph Curry. Maravich AVERAGED 44 points a game over three seasons in college (44% shooting)
http://uk.video.yahoo.com/watch/227772/1869061
April 21st, 2009 at 12:51 pm
He was named one of the 50 Greatest Players of All-Time (NBA), an honor he clearly didn’t deserve.
44% shooting is not good at all, btw. He shot a BUNCH.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:08 pm
44% shooting is not good at all, btw. He shot a BUNCH.
from 20 feet out. Let’s see how today’s NBA guards would fare taking 95% of their shots from 12+ feet out. Think D-Wade (49%) would shoot 44% if 3/4 of the time he didn’t drive to the basket. Different game.
was he one of the Top 50 all-time NBA players? most likely not like you said. Was he one of the Top 10-15 all-time college players? yes.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:11 pm
I don’t want to get into an argument about college, because that’s not my forte.
But as to your other point, he shouldn’t get a boost because he added a degree of difficulty. With no 3 point line, shooting long jumpers is a terrible strategy.
If a guy decides to swing a baseball bat with only one arm, and he somehow manages to hit .150, he still sucks, even if no one could do better than him with one arm.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:22 pm
@Nick -
Numbers were only part of the Pistol. Read his biography called Pistol. Spectacular book about 2 very flawed individuals, Pete and his dad, Press. What Pete was in the pros was about 25% of what he should have been. His dad drove him to it. What Pete could do with a ball wasn’t even dreamed of in the 60’s. He would embarrass the And 1 crew. He makes White Chocolate look like a boring fundamental player. He did things in games that guys still aren’t comfortable practicing, let alone doing in competition.
And, 44% shooting in the 60’s was very good. A 3 point line would have been an 8-10 point boost per game based on his literally unlimited range. If he would have played for someone other than his dad in college, he wouldn’t have scored nearly as much, but the other guys would have been so much better than he played with.
A healthy, non-alcholic Pistol would have changed the pro game long before Larry and Magic. The fact that he stuck around as long as he did with all of his documented physical and mental problems is a credit to the sheer talent the guy possessed.
/end of man crush’d
April 21st, 2009 at 1:33 pm
To continue on Wally’s point-
If there was a 3 pt line, your defensive strategy would have to adjust. You would need to start guarding the 3 pt line, which would open up the lane for more layups.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:34 pm
I don’t think shooting percentage should be the basis of any “is he great” arguements.
Nick, you seem to favor stats a little too much. This is why I don’t trust your “Iverson is overrated” belief. What Iverson did in 2001 when he led a Philly team with players clearly past thier prime (such as Mutumbo, McKie, Snow, Lynch, Geiger, etc) to the Finals is an accomplishment onto itself. Plus, they managed to steal a game IN LA from a Lakers playoff team that’s one of the best of all time (they posted a 15-1 record that year in the playoffs).
Iverson’s accomplishment is eerily similar to what your boy Lebron did in 2007. Neither belonged in the Finals (I thought the Bucks were a better team in 2001, just like the Pistons were a better team in 2007), but it was the superstar who carried them there.
Stats is one thing…its a bit different when you actually watch people play and you get to see thier greatness.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:39 pm
I think people conveniently knock Iverson’s supporting cast. Mutombo was Mutombo, an all-time great defensive player and rebounder. George Lynch had a career year, and Eric Snow was arguably the best perimeter defender of his era. Aaron McKie was always a useful player in his career. Those guys were not lunch meat.
Just because a team is great on the end of the court that people don’t care about does not make them a weak supporting cast.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:39 pm
THIS Kid is the Real-Deal and He’s Very-Young !!!
He’ll be a Hugh NBA Star-n-Player before the age of 24 (Book It!!!)
April 21st, 2009 at 1:40 pm
Nah, I’ll stick to my spreadsheets and Hollinger ratings.
/NickP
April 21st, 2009 at 1:42 pm
The only people who say things like that do it to grasp at air. If you could show that Pistol was a great player in any other way, you would.
It’s not unlike people preferring Scott Brosius to A-Rod.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:52 pm
It’s not unlike people preferring Scott Brosius to A-Rod.
But didn’t Brosius “will” the Yankees to like 5 wins they wouldn’t have otherwise gotten in 2000? I saw him play once and he had dirt on his uniform, so it must be true.
April 21st, 2009 at 1:56 pm
The only people who say things like that do it to grasp at air. If you could show that Pistol was a great player in any other way, you would.
Like that little thingy like getting elected to the basketball HOF?
I know you won’t read this, because you didn’t even bother with my comment where I posted the video, but read a little of his wiki for a better idea of who he weas before you compare him to a fucking Stankee 3rd baseman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pete_Maravich
I’m out for a few hours
April 21st, 2009 at 2:02 pm
Like that little thingy like getting elected to the basketball HOF?
Not to pile on here, but being elected to the Hall of Fame is somewhat overrated as a measure of someone’s success in a sport. The voting is flawed in many cases; particularly in the Baseball Hall of Fame (how else to explain people like Bill Mazeroski who were solid players but otherwise have no business being in any Hall of Fame anywhere).
I have tremendous respect for all athletes in Halls of Fame: they can all do their particular sports better than I ever could. But the fact of the matter is that some athletes get into their respective Halls of Fame based on sympathy votes and flawed logic.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:19 pm
i’m a little embarrassed at the pistol pete bashing here. just cause you guys didn’t see him doesn’t mean he wasn’t good.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:24 pm
He got to the line a ton and shoot very well from there.
44% shooting is not good at all, btw. He shot a BUNCH.
Compared to now that is not good. Havlicek was career 44% as well. Rick Barry in NBA was 45% Its different game when you can pack the box and not worry about giving up a three.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:34 pm
It’s terrible today, sure, but it wasn’t good then either.
His best year ever shooting the ball was .457. Even relative to his era, that was below average, which was .459 that season. That’s his BEST season, not his average season.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Rubio couldn’t carry Pistol’s jock.
April 21st, 2009 at 2:55 pm
98% of point guards in NBA history couldn’t carry Pistol’s jock.
he’s one of the 20 best PGs in nba history
April 21st, 2009 at 2:57 pm
im pretty sure if they’re in the NBA, they can carry an article of clothing.
/literal’d
April 21st, 2009 at 3:11 pm
i’m a little embarrassed at the pistol pete bashing here. just cause you guys didn’t see him doesn’t mean he wasn’t good.
Uh I saw the movie so that counts.
Saying he’s not necessarily good enough to be in the HOF is the same thing as saying he wasn’t good at all? Hyperbole much TBL?
April 21st, 2009 at 4:31 pm
Fact: If Rubio is available the Wizards pick him. Book it.