ZoomSlowik

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 03:04 PM) 1.6% higher shooting percentage and 6 points a game without James Worthy around is drastic? Cody Zeller's shooting percentage went up 5.3% over last season. I really wonder how Brad Stevens would do with a historically middle of the pack Big 10 team. I think people would be dissappointed. He has a great gig at Butler. I bet Todd Lickliter wishes he never left. Last I checked, 62>57.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 02:30 PM) The greatest player who ever lived had numbers that didn't drastically improve percentage-wise between his freshman and junior seasons. I wouldn't say Dean Smith was a horrible developer of talent. Indiana is hated. I get it. I don't like them either. But they won. They get the credit. People just sound like Cubs fans pointing out White Sox attendance when they want to discredit Crean. If I were an Indiana fan on here I would just tell all the haters, "you're right, he can't develop players and he's a horrible in game coach. Your guy is far better. Enjoy 5th place." He won the Big Ten. Just give him his due and move on. A college coach is the Coach, GM and Chairman of his team. For this season, up until now, Crean has been better than all the other Big Ten coaches if you base it on results. Where did I ever say Tom Crean was a horrible developer of talent? I'm saying that if you're going to argue that he's an ELITE developer of talent, you should probably have a few more examples of guys that got significantly better. As I said, I don't really give two s***s about IU since Northwestern doesn't matter enough to have rivals in basketball. I'd be saying the same thing about a lot of guys.

QUOTE (Dick Allen @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 02:12 PM) Like was mentioned earlier, sometimes numbers alone won't tell you how much a player has improved or "developed". When you start playing with better players, many times individual numbers will flatten out. It seems people don't want to grade Crean on wins and losses. Unless it's defense, improvement will generally show up in the stats. Production might dip with a better team, but you usually see it reflected elsewhere (putting up the same stats in fewer minutes for example, or better percentages and fewer turnovers while playing a similar role). Also, I never argued that none of these guys got better at all. I'm saying that outside of Oladipo, they're pretty bad examples of why a guy is a great developer of talent. Rock can easily point to Evan Turner, Lenzelle Smith, Deshaun Thomas and a bunch of other comparable players. Back when people thought Bruce Weber was good, you could point to every player on the 2005 team improving greatly over the course of their career (okay, Dee Brown not so much). Badger could probably list 20 players that sucked for Wisconsin as freshmen but turned into All-Conference players. Saying a bunch of names of players on a good team doesn't really help with evidence for great player development.

QUOTE (He_Gawn @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 01:51 PM) Sorry, I didn't think you deserved a retort. If you can't see improvement, then you don't want to see it, period. Oladipo went from nothing to POY candidate. Zellers numbers are up this year, finishes better with contact. Watford? Did you see him his freshman/sophomore years? Same with Hulls. You don't think Hulls has improved since he got here? LOL... Sheehey is one of the best 6th man in the conference. Yogi from the non-conference season to now? Have you watched IU? He runs the best offense in the country to perfection. I mean, this argument is a moot point because you don't like Crean. You can't turn every single player you recruit into an All-American (evidently like all the other coaches can, right?). Players peak, some early, some late. If you can't see that Indiana has gotten better since Crean arrived, you're helpless. A lot of those are terrible examples. Oladipo okay, the rest haven't exactly made the leap. Zeller averaged about 16-7 on 62% shooting as a freshman. This year he's averaging 17-8 on 57% shooting. WOW, HUGE difference! One of the main strikes against his draft stock is that scouts don't think he improved his game much. Watford's numbers have been fairly consistent since his freshman year. Sr- 12-6, 43/82/48 shooting Jr- 13-6, 42/81/44 shooting So- 16-5, 42/84/38 shooting Fr- 12-6, 38/80/32 shooting Basically his 3-point shooting got better. Improved, but not exactly off the charts. You can do the same thing with Hulls. He got more minutes and his shooting percentage went up from his freshman to sophomore years, but other than that his numbers have been virtually identical. Sheehey, it's really hard to say how much he's improved the last few years given he's still a role player. He's solid, but doesn't strike me as a potential All-Conference guy with more PT. Ferrell, way too early to say he's made massive improvements. He's still putting up single-digit point games a lot and isn't exactly putting up 7 assists a game. I suspect he'll be very good next year, but that'll have a lot to do with an increased role. I wouldn't put those types of developments anywhere close to what Bo Ryan does on a regular basis at Wisconsin. You can't say I'm biased either, as a Northwestern fan I only hate God.

QUOTE (zenryan @ Mar 11, 2013 -> 05:59 AM) It's is down for sure but it would help if NCST would have played up to the talent they have and if UVA didnt lose to every CAA team on their schedule. UVA can beat Duke but they lose to Delaware, George Mason and Old Dominion. That definitely doesn't help, NC State was top-10 in a lot of places pre-season. Their defense just sucks, which is kinda weird since it was closer to mediocre last year with a similar team.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Mar 7, 2013 -> 02:16 PM) If there was a real, legit chance that Rose would be out for the year, it was insanity for the Bulls to put themselves into luxury tax territory while simultaneously losing Asik. They lost players to save salary, then added enough players to try to stay competitive, but the 2nd step put them in tax territory, where they'll face the multi-year penalty if they do it again. If they wanted to stop caring about the tax and stay 100% competitive this year because they were expecting Derrick back, great. Going over the Tax when there's a good chance of 0 Rose, madnenss. It's all Kirk Hinrich's fault.

QUOTE (Rowand44 @ Mar 5, 2013 -> 10:12 PM) Michigan is so flawed. I still think they'll be the first 1/2 seed eliminated from the big dance. They look vulnerable of late, including tonight. However, I think I'd lean Georgetown. Their offensive efficiency is really low.

I think I'm going to switch it up. I'll send out some PM's to gauge interest/fill in.

QUOTE (Heads22 @ Mar 3, 2013 -> 07:38 PM) The bubble sucks this year. The fact that Baylor is still as close as they are should say something, because they are hot garbage. I don't see Iowa making a run without Gesell. Losing to Northwestern at home should relegate you to the NIT barring some major resume builders elsewhere (see Illinois).

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Mar 1, 2013 -> 02:48 PM) Which is why the Bulls using the cap/luxury tax as an excuse are full of s***. They literally couldn't add any money this year because they used their exceptions.

Rock, your team sucks. Letting Kale Abrahamson drive to the rim is laughably bad defense.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 02:09 PM) BUt still, every draft is considered weak for some reason. I just dont get the disconnect. That's a bit of an exaggeration. Teams were salivating over the Oden/Durant class (07) before the season even started. The 2008 class wasn't quite as hyped early, but they loved the talent at the top and the depth that developed. Barring injuries/significant underachievement, the 2014 draft is probably going to be considered the best since 2003. Even in an "average class" (which is what I'd call most of the recent ones, though 2010 needs to get their s*** together), there's at least some hype/belief in the #1 pick. Even before Noel got hurt, that wasn't really the case. Now that he tore his ACL, yikes. There's still going to be a few solid players (even the s***tiest drafts have a few), but good luck figuring out who those guys will be.

QUOTE (IlliniKrush @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 01:24 PM) OSU only -9 or 10 at NW? I know Rock would jump on NW, but that seems low. I think I posted this already, but you'd have to give me 30 to pick NU. They pretty much can't score 45 with this lineup unless they hit a bunch of 3's.

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 01:47 PM) John Wall still has some upside but he isn't a good basketball player and Turner is still really bad on offense. David Falk agrees with you. I'll pick out a few quotes... Another choice section that seems relevant to this discussion...

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 01:39 PM) I just want to know where this superior talent is considering I am told repeatedly that college bball has no superstars and not top tier teams. Where the hell is all of this outworldly talent? I would say a couple of things... 1) I would guess that 90% of your pro prospects are gone before the start of their junior year. The guys that are left are guys that play their way into a big-time prospect like Evan Turner. Not only do you lose the sure-fire studs, but you lose guys that might have developed into actual studs by their junior year but left because their potential put them in the lottery. Because of this, guys do more development in the pros than in college. 2) Because of that last one, the upside of the elite programs is strongly tied to the caliber of the freshman class. Of course any talent pool is going to be cyclical, so that creates peaks and valleys. There was some very good talent in the 2008 tournament, but of course it was all gone the next year. Some of the recent classes haven't been that strong. 2013 is a great recruiting class, so next year should be better. 3) IMO, zone defenses make it harder for elite athletes to show off their abilities in college. An example I like to use is the 2009 Kentucky team. They had amazing raw talent, but none of them can shoot and their guards didn't know what to do if they couldn't drive to the rim. Because of that, teams would pack the paint and force them to shoot, so they didn't always dominate like they should. In the NBA, you see 98% man-to-man D and the pace is faster so they can get up and down the floor. I think this especially hurts big men because most good ones will get doubled immediately before they have a chance to use a post move (of course most of them don't have post moves, especially early in their college careers, but that's another topic).

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 01:25 PM) The 94 through 2002 drafts would have almost no impact on the Bulls dynasty. Not to mention that a lot of those drafts except from 2000-2002 (which impacts the current era, not the 90s) were pretty damn solid. The 96 draft produced Kobe, Iverson, Ray Allen, Marcus Camby, Nash, Jermaine O'Neal, Peja Stojakovic, plus other solid players like Abdur-Rahim, Walker, Marbury (before his head got in the way of what should have been a great career) and Ilgauskas. I'd put that draft up against any draft from 03-present including the James, Wade, Anthony and Bosh draft. I'm not seeing this great talent gap in the 03-present drafts against the 90s drafts. The 2010 draft looks f***ing awful by the way. Paul George and Greg Monroe as the best players from a draft? Gross. And while its early, aside from Kyrie Irving, there are no true impact players in the 2011 draft class (although I do love Faried) and this years class isn't setting the world on fire. For once I had the SHORTER version of a post saying the same thing.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 12:10 PM) You throw a silly Bills Simmons quote at me stating that Kevin Johnson would average 30/15 in today's game and you want to talk about substance? Rightttttt. And these one or two game outliers you reference mean nothing. I've seen Dana Barros score 50 in a game. I've seen Tony Delk score 50 in a game. I've seen Muhammad Abdul Rauf, or whatever his name was, go on insane scoring binges. These guys weren't even borderline all-stars. it's quite simple: Bulls fans won't admit this, and I sure didn't at the time, but the 90's was watered down as s***. You don't add 6 new teams in 8 years, as the league did from '87 through '94, and not see the league take a big hit overall. That's basically a new team a year. The drafts from '94 through '2002 were ugly. I'm talking Kirstie Alley ugly. Just f***ing Awful. The 2000/2001 particularly were the worst ever. It's taken a while, but the league has finally caught up to all that expansion from the late 80's, early 90's. Look at the drafts from '03 through last year and compare them to '94 through '02. it's like comparing Joyce Dewitt to Snookie. The talent is simply better now. Nothing to do with a few rule changes 8 years ago. I don't think you've looked at the drafts very closely. 1996 was a stellar draft and several other ones over that stretch produced quite a few All-Stars. On the flip side, the 2004 draft was Dwight and a few fringe stars (several of which were high schoolers in the teens), the top-10 in the 2005 draft was horrific outside of Paul and Williams, Adam freakin' Morrison went in the top-5 of the 2006 draft, and though it's early, 2010 looks pretty crappy and 2011 looks okay outside of Kyrie (a lot of good role players now, we'll see if we get another star).

QUOTE (whitesoxfan99 @ Feb 28, 2013 -> 10:32 AM) Rajon Rondo is a 4 time all star and isn't any better than 1 time all star Mookie Blaylock was at his peak. I agree that the depth of the PG position now is better than it has ever been but that wasn't a great example. That has more to do with the overrated status of Rondo than anything.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Feb 27, 2013 -> 11:42 PM) Give it up, dude. the PG position is the most stacked it's ever been in the history of the game. And it's not all attributed to rule changes. They're bigger, stronger, more athletic and more diverse than 20 years ago, easy. Kevin Johnson average 30 a game? Not without a jumper, let alone a 3-point shot. lol@15 assists. the pace those suns teams played on dwarfs any in today's game. he wouldn't sniff 15 assists. It's a good group right now, but it's not like every one of them is 6'5", blazing quick with great hops and can shoot the lights out. They all have their flaws. KJ was listed at 6'1" 180. The best PG in the league right now is listed at 6'0" 175. HUGE difference. Added on edit- I'm not arguing the KJ 30-15 part, that's purely speculation and not a productive line of discussion. My only comment is it's not leaps and bounds different outside of a couple of outliers athletically. It's not like the NFL where we would be looking at 220 pound linemen.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Feb 27, 2013 -> 07:44 PM) Bad loss, real bad. Lol, bet NW takes us down tomorrow. NU has been garbage since that last game. They basically need to hit like 12 threes to keep it within 20. I would need to get 30 to take NU.

Yeah...that's a pretty horrendous loss.

I'm going to bump this for 2013. Any takers? I strongly prefer auctions to normal drafts, and if we could do it with keeper values that would be groin-grabbingly transcendent.

I don't know why anyone is surprised by the results since the All-Star break. They crushed the Bobcats, beat the Hornets and got crushed by the Heat and Thunder. What exactly do you expect them to do without Rose? If anything the early run made less sense because they'd beat teams like the Heat and Knicks and then lose to s***-shows like the Bobcats and Suns. Without Rose, they're exactly what everyone thought they were: a team that wins with defense and effort and gets by on offense. They're always going to have little margin for error against legitimately good teams until #1 gets back. Luckily for the Bulls, two thirds of the NBA is varying degrees of mediocre so they're still over .500.

He said would you trade FOR Rip, not trade him. Especially since the team acquiring him would either need to be under the cap or have a trade exception.

I'm not terribly interested in a new console right now given the amount of use I can still get out of my PS3, but some of those features/games look really good.