ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 5, 2009 -> 04:34 PM) I can read his draftexpress profile too. But that all still goes with his decision making. If he's off-balance and fading away he does not need to be taking the shot. Kid was maybe the best shooter of his class and the term "NBA range" was synonymous with him by the time he was a junior in high school. He had some growing pains of course playing against top level competition as a freshman, but he'll figure it out eventually. Not to infer it'll be any easier in the NBA, but we can afford to wait around with this pick, as I don't see the Bulls doing too much next year. It's really not decision making, he fades on virtually every shot, even if he's wide open. Check out the highlight tapes some time, he's been doing it for quite some time. It doesn't really matter how much range he has if he's going to convert at that kind of rate.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 5, 2009 -> 03:11 PM) Not really true. He has some crazy range, he just needs to work on his shot selection. And he can still create as good as anyone in the draft. I figure with how bad this draft is, we're undoubtedly going to get a flawed with the 16th pick. Tyreke I do believe is the way to go. He's a mega talent that fits a need. He just needs to become a lot smarter player. It's more than just shot selection, his form is bad. He's often off-balance and is usually fading away. He only converted 25% of his jumpshots and 27% from the arc, that strongly suggests that it's more than just shot selection.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ May 5, 2009 -> 01:03 PM) Not a lot of Tyreke Evans love. Because from what Ive seen that guy can play. I don't think people question that he has some ability. He has great size, pretty good quickness and can handle the ball well enough to get to the basket. He can be a shutdown defender if he wants to be and can obviously be a dangerous slasher. He has significant flaws though: he's a sub par shooter, has shown that he struggles a lot more off the ball, and he's shown that he can be a ballhog that makes poor decisions with his shot selection. Unless he changes his attitude and playing style or greatly improves his jumper there seems to be a pretty good chance he falls into that Ricky Davis/Corey Maggette zone of guys that put up great numbers on bad teams but do more harm than good on decent ones.

Big fan of the brisket/pulled pork stand behind section 149. It may be $6.50, but it's well worth it. You get a tasty, filling sandwich, a bag of chips and a pickle. Gotta load it up with the extra sauce too.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 29, 2009 -> 12:58 PM) When Gordon wasn't shooting, Drose or Brad Miller was turning it over. I'll take BGs poor shooting on top of getting to the line game any day. When it was crunch time he went to the line for 3 and had that off the backboard shot. Bottom line, we lose by 10+ without him out there yesterday. The only regret I had for yesterday was Kirk should have received a lot more PT, in favor of ROSE. As Balta said, I don't have a problem with Gordon getting the call on the last shot as much as Gordon GETTING AN ISO on the last shot on a night where he shot 6-21. If he's not pulling great contested shots out of his ass at a high rate like he has for good chunks of this series, it's not a particularly good call. Pretty much everyone was bad late in the game, that's why they blew an 11-point lead. That's not the issue, the issue is what call gets you the best chance at converting. At least run Gordon off some screens before getting him the shot or get it to him on a drive and kick, that'll get him a much better look.

QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Apr 29, 2009 -> 11:54 AM) Are you kidding me? Why the f*** should Derek Rose get the ball? Seriously, I'm sick of people that continue to complain about Gordon. I was Gordons biggest knocker throughout his career but come on. Derek Rose was awful yesterday and giving him the ball, puhleease. Maybe he'd have tripped over himself or gotten bailed out on a block call and than b****ed and cried to the refs like he did last night all game long. I'm not buying Rose as much as most on here are. I think he's got the potential to be great but a lot of people here have annoited him far sooner than he should get annoited. Yet its guys like Hinrich, Gordon, Noah, heck even Salmons (defensively Salmons has played good, offensively, you can tell he's hurting big time) that are as much a part of this series as Rose. Gordon wasn't exactly having a great night either, he was 6-21 from the floor for christ's sake. Granted he was getting a bunch of free throws, but an isolation play for Gordon probably wasn't going to end well with the night he was having. He's had a great series, but if he's not hot a Rose drive is their best option because the odds are far higher that Rose will find the big man cutting to the basket or hit Gordon/Salmons for an open jumper. With Gordon on an isolation the odds are extremely high that he's going to throw up a contested jumper, which can work but is far from ideal if he's having an off night. As for Rose, he's turning it over at a much higher rate than we're used to and his D has been quite bad, but he's also averaging 18-6-7 on the series and shooting 49% from the floor (yes, I realize his great game 1 inflates that, but his game 3 performance hurts just as much). That's pretty damn good for a rookie PG, and if he ever learns to draw fouls/get calls he's going to be essentially unstoppable.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 27, 2009 -> 10:08 AM) I'm willing to give him a pass on it for now for multiple reasons: 1. He's a rookie 2. He has a dreadful coach 3. He's going from a 40 game season to at least an 88 game season, hopefully more. With that change, the conditioning difference is so big...we saw guys like Wade and Lebron take a couple years to round in to solid defensive players when they came up, and simply having the energy to keep the effort up throughout the game was a big reason why. 4. His body still has development to do, especially in the strength category. I would add that the PG position typically has a very low success rate for first year players. Chris Paul, Jason Kidd and Stephon Marbury are the only rookie PG's that come to mind that contributed above average play at the position. Rose is well ahead of what you can typically expect from a young PG and expecting him to be a complete player this early is kind of ridiculous.

QUOTE (nitetrain8601 @ Apr 27, 2009 -> 09:43 AM) Does Gordon put up selfish shots? No. He's more efficient scoring wise than Wade and LBJ actually as well. Again, as I've stated before, in the top 20 in scoring, Ben has the lowest amount of FGA only behind Dwight Howard for anyone who averages over 20PPG. So to say he is selfish and jacks up shot for the hell of it is incorrect and erroneous. Again, another myth. Now does Ben take heatcheck shots? Hell yes he does. But that's what all great scorers do. Jordan did it. Kobe LBJ and Wade sure as hell do it. I'll take those 3 or 4 heatcheck shots a game if he's still keeping up his insane TS%. Plus, I think he may be only behind Tyrus Thomas in terms of FTA per game on this team, so I don't wanna hear he doesn't get to the line either. This whole section is quite biased. -First off, Devin Harris and Paul Pierce also take fewer shots per game than Ben, and Chris Paul is at 16.1 attempts. -Second, using that as the reason that he is the "most efficient" is a flawed stat because many of those players average far more than 20.7 points. Wade takes 6 more shots but also averages 9 and a half more points. Lebron takes 4 more shots and averages almost 8 more points. Durant takes 3 more shots and averages 4 and a half more points. I think you get the point. -To continue on that last point, he's not quite the super-elite scorer you make him out to be. Of all of the qualified players that scored 20 PPG, only Al Harrington and Joe Johnson attempted fewer free throws. He also finished tied for 69th in true shooting percentage (34 of which played over 30 MPG) and tied for 13th among qualified shooting guards, so I'm not sure how that's "insane". Very good, yes, elite or most efficient, no. In order for him to fit either of those descriptions he'd really have to be a bigger threat off the dribble. While he's not terrible in that regard, he's not particularly good at it either. He is an elite shooter that the Bulls need a lot more than most teams given their lack of scoring up front and highly questionable ability to create shots outside of him and Rose. That said, he is not a superstar or franchise changer that they must keep at all costs (yeah, yeah, neither are Deng or Hinrich). If they can retain him for somewhere below Deng's contract value (not making a comparison on which would be worse, just a reference point) then by all means bring him back. However, if they simply can't come to terms with him, life will go on. Salmons and Deng are reasonable short-term solutions at the wing spots and they'll have quite a bit of cap space to work with in 2010.

QUOTE (Ron @ Apr 22, 2009 -> 02:30 PM) I don't think Green would begin as a starter with us. I honestly think he'll fall to the 2nd round and be one of this drafts' sleepers. So many GMs draft on athleticism and upside. Green is a solid, but not extraordinary athlete and I think he's seen as "a finished product". But you look over his time with UNC, he's improved every year. He's got a great work ethic. I think that will serve him well. I was already budgeting in 20 games missed for Deng. I guess I did jump the gun, he won't start right away. Assuming Gordon leaves he'd have to absorb heavy minutes either way. I really think some playoff team looking for role players will grab him in the late 1st.

QUOTE (Ron @ Apr 22, 2009 -> 12:37 PM) If the Bulls want Ellington, I think he'll be there with their second 1st rounder from the Thabo trade. I honestly think his Heel teammate Danny Green could be as good or better of a pro though. 6'6", plays great D, improved his stroke from 3 this season, a very solid guard. I like Green a lot, he should be a very good starting wing player as long as he's the 4th or 5th scoring option. My only concern with him replacing Gordon would be the hit to the offense. A lineup of Rose-Green-Salmons/Deng-Thomas-Noah doesn't have a whole lot of firepower, Rose would have to create like 90% of the team's shots.

QUOTE (FedEx227 @ Apr 22, 2009 -> 12:14 PM) That's not entirely true. Evans had a great year from beyond the arc, can create his own shot (unlike Gordon) and doesn't need to have the ball in his hands at all times, he took over the PG duties because Memphis desperately needed scoring, that was the only reason. He'd be a fine SG at the next level. Plays solid defense, well known for getting steals, + rebounder, ability to drive to the basket and above-average shooting ability. Unfortunately mocks are all over the place right now, so I guess we'll wait and see. Seriously? Since when is 27.4% from behind the arc "a great year"? He's not a good shooter at all, he gets the vast majority of his points on drives to the basket, often out of control when doing it. It's kind of hard to drive when you don't have the ball. Funny you should mention the move to PG, because before that move he was shooting about 40% from the floor and was still turning it over quite a bit. Gordon isn't as good a finisher on the drive as he is, but Ben is adept at getting open jumpers in various ways which he buries at a high rate. Evans has great size and he's a pretty good ball-handler for a wing player. However, his shooting leaves a lot to be desired and many teams are concerned about his ball-hogging tendencies that make him very turnover prone. People also aren't really sold on his work ethic either. That's why despite the fact that he obviously has lottery-level tools that he's not a 100% lock to go in the lottery. On a bad team that needs someone to generate shots and try to take over he can be an asset, on a team that already has a developing franchise player there's a very real potential that he'll end up having a greatly reduced or negative impact, much like Quentin Richardson or Corey Maggette.

QUOTE (FedEx227 @ Apr 22, 2009 -> 10:17 AM) See, here's the problem. The Bulls aren't the only team that pick in this year's draft. Also they don't have a pick till 16, when Henderson and Ellington will both be gone. And no Steph Curry for me, he's a college 6'1, which will likely "magically" transform to 5'9 once he gets to Pre-Draft camps. He'll be a marginally better version of JJ Reddick at the next level. Pass. Henderson probably, Ellington that's probably the upper reaches of where he goes unless he works out well. Either way, Evans is just a brutal fit with Rose. Both players need the ball in their hands to produce and neither is a particularly strong outside shooter.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 16, 2009 -> 12:21 PM) The last 10 games have not been the Celts best effort on D. I would say KG has a little to do with that. Their collective defense takes a major hit as well as their offense. The series is not as lopsided as some would suggest. I'm not saying the Celtics will roll, but it's not like they're totally screwed now that Garnett is out either. They still have a very good perimeter trio that can light up the Bulls' highly suspect perimeter D, and it's not like you need to be a superstar to get buckets inside either. I'd still take the Celtics in 6, they Bulls either need Rose to go into superstar mode or Tyrus and Noah have to have a decided edge inside in the majority of the games (I can really only see that happening in about 3 since neither can really create their own shot).

The difference is that the guards on the Celtics actually play some defense, which shifts things in their favor. Rondo and Allen could easily get 40 a game (combined obviously) in the series, especially since they will be getting more minutes than in the regular season.

As the past two people have said, you really shouldn't get all worked up over anything posted on Bleacher Report. Any idiot can create an account and post whatever idiotic article full of flawed logic, horrendously one-sided trade ideas or flat-out inaccurate assertions that they feel like writing in their spare time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:14 PM) That's all you're writing him down for? If he's pulling in 20-12 we might legit have a shot. I'm scared of him going for like 20/20, or 30/15, or crazy numbers like that. If he's putting up average games, then we have a shot. Noah's probably still going to pull down double-doubles, TT has been more effective with his shot lately, and our outside guys are more than solid. The real Bulls weakness this year has been being absolutely torched by big guys, and that hasn't changed down the stretch as the team has improved either. Well, I was saying as a bare minimum. Of course he can go off for numbers like that at any given time, and it doesn't appear that the Bulls' frontcourt can do much to stop him. QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:16 PM) I never said they would shut down Dwight. I just said give him fits. Big difference. Dwight can still go 30-20 no matter how frustrated he is. He's that good. I would like to see Miller or Noah do their best to put a body on him, Gray hack the s*** out of him 6 times and Tyrus Jump at every shot he takes. Even with all that, it will probably be a lost cause. I do like our chances only if Orlando is depending on Dwight by himself. Okay, that's different then. I pretty much said the same thing a while ago, if the Bulls' backcourt can have a few of those games where Rose/Gordon/Salmons combine for 55 or more and Orlando's perimeter players are significantly off that's another story. I still have a hard time seeing them take more than 2 games barring some weird things happening though.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 02:02 PM) That does not burst my bubble at all. Lewis was on the floor and healthy. Someone had to stop him and it looks like it was accomplished, however that allowed other areas of the Magic offense to excel. If it is known knowledge that Lewis and Hedo are playing at 50% or so, that changes all the Dynamics of the offense. and don't you think the Bulls shooting 31% had a little to do with such a lopsided loss? Are you depending on the Bulls to shoot that poorly in a series? I don't really care about the margin as much as your assertion that if the Magic's perimeter players are off that they can stop Dwight. They haven't really slowed him down at all in any of their matchups, even in my example where their two other scorers were hurt/way off. Hell, they couldn't stop Tony Battie and Marcin Gortat in that particular game much less Dwight. If the game is even remotely close you can pretty much mark him down for 20-12, so the Bulls perimeter players are going to have to make up quite a bit of ground.

QUOTE (rangercal @ Apr 14, 2009 -> 01:45 PM) Howard will have problems with Noah if he has to worry about a lurking Tyrus. If your perimeter game is lacking, you better believe Tyrus will stay close to the paint. Nate may be able to jump over Dwight, but Tyrus can too and he's a foot taller than Nate. I hate to burst your bubble, but the last time they played Hedo sat out, Lewis was 0-9 from the field, and Dwight was still 6-7 from the floor in his 22 minutes in a 28-point win... The theory that anyone on the Bulls can stop Dwight just isn't particularly valid, their only saving grace is he seems to get fewer attempts against the Bulls. Their only real hope is that the Bulls' perimeter players out-duel the Magic's perimeter players, which may not be far-fetched given the play of the former of late and the injury issues for the latter.

QUOTE (T R U @ Apr 4, 2009 -> 04:52 PM) I wasn't trying to pick on you directly there was just a ton of anti magic material and I thought this was the easiest to quote and bring up. IIRC, they were like 2-3 to start the year and Zoom and a bunch of people were just goin on how they were average and not that great. Actually, I believe it came after they damn near blew like a 24 point lead to the Bulls back when they (as in the Bulls) were playing like absolute crap. I believe what I said was that outside of Dwight's dominance they rely way too much on the jumper, much like the Bulls, and that'd burn them when it matters, I'll stand by that especially now that Nelson's out (he was having an outstanding year).

QUOTE (MHizzle85 @ Mar 31, 2009 -> 02:31 PM) As for Derrick being ROY? I'll take it, but OJ Mayo is having a better year. It's just that Mayo's on a s***ty team. I strongly disagree, Rose has been virtually as productive offensively (especially outside of November when Mayo shot aburdly well) despite not having a strong outside shot and creates far more shots for his teammates while still turning it over less than Mayo. Heck, Mayo's scoring average in March is under 15 a game, which hurts when that's about all you bring to the table.

Oak Park and River Forest are both very close to Forest Park, so I can see the confusion. You're probably thinking of River Forest, which is only a couple of miles from Madison Ave. and had an average household income of nearly 90k according to the 2000 census (though Oak Park is closer to 60k, there is some spill-over).

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 25, 2009 -> 12:42 PM) If Schilling is a HOF, than David Wells is right there. That makes zero sense, they may have relatively comparable career records, but Schilling's career ERA is over half a run lower.

Aw crap, I totally spaced and forgot to delete this league before the draft. My bad guys, I guess we're all stuck in a horribly shallow league.

Come on guys, no one plays roto? I'm afraid I'm going to have to delete the league if I don't get at least 10 by 5 PM or so...

Come on guys, we only have 7 with the draft coming up, we really need some more people.