Subscribe
Follow Us
As people, we like to revisit history. Famous author and podcaster Malcolm Gladwell has an audio series titled “revisionist history” which goes back and takes topics and fleshes them out further. By doing this, the listener becomes more learned on the subject.
In the same way, basketball fans like to look back and compare players in different eras. We use all-encompassing box score stats as well as streamlined court-time, like 36 minutes and 100 possessions. That way, the context may be added to the statistical production across eras. Though it's very controversial and an imperfect way of defining impact, it's a step to subjectively understanding and comparing the value of one athlete to the other.
However, when you compare one player to another in the same era, it's less inhibiting. One can make logical claims because it's *generally* the same style being played year to year. There haven't been major rule changes in the past two decades, and its allowed for basketball to flourish and evolve to what it is today.
Boston Celtics point guard Kyrie Irving is a bit younger than Minnesota Timberwolves point guard Derrick Rose. Both were drafted into the NBA two years apart. Irving was drafted out of Duke in 2011, Rose was drafted out of Memphis in 2009. Each was drafted with the number one overall pick in their respective offseason's.
They came into the league with a ton of hype, and each in their own ways has left a legacy on the teams they were drafted on. Rose was the league MVP on the 2010-11 Bulls, and Irving hit possibly the most important shot in Cleveland Cavaliers history. Irving has only recently been the best player on his own team, but Rose was until he was traded away to the New York Knicks.
Derrick Rose suffered many leg injuries during his young career, which really derailed his overall ability as a player as well as his value to the Chicago Bulls franchise. His explosiveness really made him such an impacting scorer. Nightly, he could beat nearly anyone off the dribble and get to the basket with a variety of shifty finishes.
His three-point shot was never really there until this season. He did shoot 34 percent from beyond the arc in the 2013-14 season with the Bulls, but he never really sustained any kind of success. He's shot only 30.9 percent from deep averaging only about 2.6 attempts per game.
On the other hand, Kyrie Irving has always been a super efficient scorer from beyond the arc. He's shot 38.9 percent from beyond the arc on 5.3 attempts per game. Simply because of how the modern NBA offense is set up, Irving would be more effective early on compared to Rose because of his ability to truly stretch the floor.
Rose was a much better playmaker than Irving in his prime. Sometimes Derrick Rose (in his young age) would make a bone-headed jump pass that would just make anyone shake their head. In his MVP season, Rose had an assist percentage of 38.7 percent on the season, and the following season it eclipsed forty. Irving has only eclipsed 35 percent twice.
Irving clearly has the better handles. He probably has the best handles of any player all-time. This isn't to say Rose didn't have great handles, but it's tough to compare to someone like Irving who's entire offensive genius starts with his fancy dribbles. Rose beat players off the dribble with his pure athleticism. Irving does with a nasty crossover hesitation.
Something many people forget is that Irving has just as much of a storied injury past as Rose does. Irving hardy played at Duke in college, and he's only hit 70 regular season games played three times in his entire career. He's had injuries on and off, especially to his lower body.
Fans never got to see a healthy Kyrie Irving completely carry a team like Rose did in his third year in the league because of injuries, and then LeBron James came around in 2014. He's never really had the opportunity to fully lead a team into the playoffs. He's the Celtics best player, but he doesn't need to score 30 points a night to carry the team. Coach Brad Stevens has so much depth on the roster that it allows Irving to pick and choose when he wants to attack.
Also, Derrick Rose never got the opportunity in his prime to lead a more modern offense with the three-point shooting ability he has now. With both players hadn't had to struggle with injury, the possibilities would've been endless for both. They could have been MVP candidates for multiple seasons and changed the course of the NBA for good.
It all comes down to this – could Rose have been a better player than Irving if Irving had never gotten injured? It takes so much circumstantial context to compare that, that even the raw statistical production from the hypothetical couldn't even be fairly compared.
Rose has the higher ceiling. If he had perfected his three-point shot, he was a more explosive athlete and a better playmaker. He'd probably be a top-five NBA player right now. Irving could also be someone who's considered more of an alpha-leader if he had the chance to play on a better Cleveland team earlier in his career.
So to answer your question: yes, Derrick Rose would've probably been the better player. But let's not forget that both in their prime were top point guards, which meant so much for both the cities of Cleveland and Chicago.
