iWiN4PreP Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Dunno if this should be in the Funny video's thread or here, LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nitetrain8601 Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 07:38 AM) It's more than that. His jump shot right now is off the charts. He's shooting 51% from the field in January, and 55% over this last stretch of games. Jackpot. He's simply shooting the best he's ever shot in his life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (Chisoxfn @ Jan 29, 2010 -> 04:43 PM) So the Bulls would have enough money to be able to land both Gay/Stoudemire and keep Hinrich? How is that possible? Trading Deng for Stoudemire, somehow dumping Salmons, and showing everyone one else how the Larry Bird Rule works. Also, Brad Miller, you are awesome. Deng, I don't like you, but you have been awesome tonight. We have one 5 straight road games against good Western teams. What. Edited January 30, 2010 by Quinarvy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clyons Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Wow. Five. Break up the Bullies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Rose wasn't even his usual self and they pulled that one out (though CP3 being hurt down that OT stretch did help alittle thanks to David West ). Good overall team win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 ESPN just said something interesting. The Bulls are the first team (in NBA history) to win 5 straight games against 5 winning opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxFan1 Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 02:45 AM) ESPN just said something interesting. The Bulls are the first team (in NBA history) to win 5 straight games against 5 winning opponents. No s***? That has to be on the road. Even then it sounds off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 01:45 AM) ESPN just said something interesting. The Bulls are the first team (in NBA history) to win 5 straight games against 5 winning opponents. Come on, you are telling me the 72-10 bulls didnt pull that off? Or any of the teams that cleared 60 wins? That seems kind of out there Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iWiN4PreP Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 Must be on the road ^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 30, 2010 Author Share Posted January 30, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 01:45 AM) ESPN just said something interesting. The Bulls are the first team (in NBA history) to win 5 straight games against 5 winning opponents. Wow, impressive. It took a little bit of luck at the end, but those are the things that happen when you are hot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dick Allen Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 07:40 AM) Come on, you are telling me the 72-10 bulls didnt pull that off? Or any of the teams that cleared 60 wins? That seems kind of out there They probably didn't play 5 straight road games against teams with winning records. There is a catch, but its still quite an accomplishment. Too bad the Bullies played like crap against the easier portion of this trip. It could have been epic. Edited January 30, 2010 by Dick Allen Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 30, 2010 Share Posted January 30, 2010 I figure the teams of the past (I was wondering it to, the 72-10 Bulls and the 22 straight Rockets SHOULD have accomplished it, right?) always ended up having a below .500 team playing somewhere in the midst of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chw42 Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 The Bulls should have a 7 game winning streak going into a tough game against the Hawks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve9347 Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 06:57 PM) The Bulls should have a 7 game winning streak going into a tough game against the Hawks. I'd definitely agree with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoxAce Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (chw42 @ Jan 30, 2010 -> 06:57 PM) The Bulls should have a 7 game winning streak going into a tough game against the Hawks. We should.. but then again this team usually plays bad against the sub-par to sucky teams so we'll see. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 The fact that the Bulls are playing so well right now just frustrates me even more. Because ultimately this is still a .500 team. As they have been the last few years. I'd rather suck ass and have a shot at John Wall than make the playoffs as a 7/8 seed and get swept by the Cavs or Celtics. And I still don't believe any marque FA will come here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 01:29 AM) The fact that the Bulls are playing so well right now just frustrates me even more. Because ultimately this is still a .500 team. As they have been the last few years. I'd rather suck ass and have a shot at John Wall than make the playoffs as a 7/8 seed and get swept by the Cavs or Celtics. And I still don't believe any marque FA will come here. What would we do with John Wall? Sign-and-trade him to Toronto? Put him at Shooting Guard? Even though Kirk is disliked, unless we're trading Rose, he's better for the team than Wall. He defends the tougher guard for Derrick and moves the ball. Wall would help if we trade Kirk somewhere for expiring contracts, Deng and Tyrus to Phoenix for Amar'e, and sign Gay. Then you can run a super SSOL offense, but my god that would be painful defense. The only way I'd like to see Wall is a sign and trade for Bosh. Edited January 31, 2010 by Quinarvy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jordan4life_2007 Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 02:56 AM) What would we do with John Wall? Sign-and-trade him to Toronto? Put him at Shooting Guard? Even though Kirk is disliked, unless we're trading Rose, he's better for the team than Wall. He defends the tougher guard for Derrick and moves the ball. Wall would help if we trade Kirk somewhere for expiring contracts, Deng and Tyrus to Phoenix for Amar'e, and sign Gay. Then you can run a super SSOL offense, but my god that would be painful defense. The only way I'd like to see Wall is a sign and trade for Bosh. I have no idea what we would do with Wall. But I'm a firm believer in that you ALWAYS take the best player available. I don't care about position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 05:08 AM) I have no idea what we would do with Wall. But I'm a firm believer in that you ALWAYS take the best player available. I don't care about position. Just for perspective, Beasley was considered to be the better player and we needed a PF and had a good PG. It was the rarity of PG's like Rose that made them take Rose. We have a PG like that now, so it'd be foolish to take him unless you can trade him for a star. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted January 31, 2010 Author Share Posted January 31, 2010 The way Wall can score, you could have them both on the floor at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MurcieOne Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 02:23 PM) Just for perspective, Beasley was considered to be the better player and we needed a PF and had a good PG. It was the rarity of PG's like Rose that made them take Rose. We have a PG like that now, so it'd be foolish to take him unless you can trade him for a star. Not sure that is true. I think Rose was considered the better player but since we had a PG and needed a PF some people argued we should have drafted for need. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fathom Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 11:26 PM) The way Wall can score, you could have them both on the floor at the same time. Wall is really struggling in the half court offense in SEC play. His turnovers are still out of control. In no way could he play shooting guard with Rose at the point guard. Cousins would be the better fit for the Bulls actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 04:26 PM) The way Wall can score, you could have them both on the floor at the same time. The Super SSOL. QUOTE (MurcieOne @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 04:47 PM) Not sure that is true. I think Rose was considered the better player but since we had a PG and needed a PF some people argued we should have drafted for need. I heard the Oden/Durant argument. One would be better (Beasley and Durant) but the other could be a top player at premier position. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodAsGould Posted January 31, 2010 Share Posted January 31, 2010 QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 05:12 PM) The Super SSOL. I heard the Oden/Durant argument. One would be better (Beasley and Durant) but the other could be a top player at premier position. Nah, with Oden/Durant there was a real debate over it, I think Rose was actually more highly thought of than Beasley for the most part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quin Posted February 1, 2010 Share Posted February 1, 2010 QUOTE (GoodAsGould @ Jan 31, 2010 -> 05:32 PM) Nah, with Oden/Durant there was a real debate over it, I think Rose was actually more highly thought of than Beasley for the most part. Eh, I always heard until the draft itself that Beasley would be the better player. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.