Jump to content

NBA Offseason Thread


Recommended Posts

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 06:40 PM)
I think they'll "improve" but it won't manifest itself in the standings. 62 wins is a lot, so it'd be hard to go up. Regular season wins are highly overrated in my opinion. The Heat won fewer games than Lebron's last two Cavs' teams, but I think everyone would agree that the Heat were far more dangerous. I don't really see them "regressing" anywhere but in the standings, and even then I think they can get the #1 seed because they're built for the grind of the regular season.

 

There are two main things I'm looking for from the Bulls for improvement 1) Noah being healthier and more consistent 2) Rose getting more efficient and putting up the same stats in fewer minutes with a better FG%. I'm not a big Rip fan either, but if he can provide any kind of offense that would give them a different dimension as well. That way they can run TWO guys off a billion screens instead of just having Korver do it!

 

I've got the Knicks at about 50, which is a sizeable improvement already but probably 5-10 short of the Heat/Bulls. Carmelo is a damn good player, but he's never seemed to have the same kind of ability to carry an inferior roster like most of the other superstars have. Same goes for Amare, at times he might have been the third best player in Phoenix. They're both incredibly talented but still need to put everything together to reach the elite level as a team, especially since Chandler isn't really the kind of #3 that can pick up the scoring slack.

 

I think somebody is forgetting we're only playing 66 games this season. Unless you've got the Heat going 60-6. ;)

 

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 06:42 PM)
where is this likely regression you are referring to? who played so much over their heads in your opinion?

 

You know, this is a good question. I can't even answer it. The Bulls winning 62 games last year was pretty astounding considering the roster makeup. Maybe the defense falls off? I don't think it will. They just scream semi-fluke to me. But you just don't see too many teams so overly reliant on one player get to the finals, let alone win it.

Edited by Jordan4life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 06:59 PM)
The '01 Sixers! Yes, that's what I mean. Sorry, just came to me. I think the situations are very similar. Nobody on that '01 Sixer team did anything exceptional outside of Iverson. They came back with roughly the same team and never got close again.

 

lol! ok. the end

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 06:59 PM)
The '01 Sixers! Yes, that's what I mean. Sorry, just came to me. I think the situations are very similar. Nobody on that '01 Sixer team did anything exceptional outside of Iverson. They came back with roughly the same team and never got close again.

 

If you are comparing the supporting cast of the 01 Sixers to that of this Bulls team, you are out of your mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why does everyone assuming saying a team was lucky is this grave travesty against human nature? The Bulls obviously had a great season, thanks largely to their superb defense. They were a very, very good team that had the right set of circumstances surrounding their season to win 62 games. Just because they were lucky doesn't mean they weren't a great team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 06:40 PM)
I think they'll "improve" but it won't manifest itself in the standings. 62 wins is a lot, so it'd be hard to go up.

I have to agree. 62 wins this season would set some sort of record.

Edited by Steve9347
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Brian @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 07:06 PM)
If you are comparing the supporting cast of the 01 Sixers to that of this Bulls team, you are out of your mind.

 

Who was the second leading scorer on that Sixer team? I bet you most people would have to look it up. Both teams were defensive-oriented and relied heavily on the scoring/playmaking of a guard. It's not a ridiculous comparison at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen, J4L is a baiter. He says things to rile people up. The Knicks have less depth than last year's Heat, and obviously LeBron, Wade, and Bosh are way better than Melo, Amar'e, and Tyson.

 

I mean, he just blatantly said Tyson was better than Joakim Noah, which couldn't be further from the truth. I will tell you what, there's a reason a guy like Tyson Chandler was continually given away by teams. There's also a reason the Knicks are never without an albatross of a contract. Hence, Tyson's signing, it felt odd for the roster to not have at least one "uh oh" contract.

 

And Felix, I don't know that you can say the Bulls were "lucky" last year. They played with maximum effort for 82 regular season games. I do think they need to find that happy medium where they take the foot off the gas a bit so they can go toe to toe with a team like the Heat, where you have to be able to play balls to the wall for 48 minutes. They need to be smarter this year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 07:53 PM)
Who was the second leading scorer on that Sixer team? I bet you most people would have to look it up. Both teams were defensive-oriented and relied heavily on the scoring/playmaking of a guard. It's not a ridiculous comparison at all.

Comparing this Bulls supporting cast to the 00-01 76ers supporting cast is basically telling the world you are basketball stupid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 07:56 PM)
Comparing this Bulls supporting cast to the 00-01 76ers supporting cast is basically telling the world you are basketball stupid.

 

lol. I'm looking at the roster and it's even less impressive than what I remembered.

 

Unless you're saying the Bulls' roster is better? Nobody has clarified that.

Edited by Jordan4life
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 07:53 PM)
Who was the second leading scorer on that Sixer team? I bet you most people would have to look it up. Both teams were defensive-oriented and relied heavily on the scoring/playmaking of a guard. It's not a ridiculous comparison at all.

 

That Sixers' team had a point differential of 4.3. The Bulls were at 7.3 last year. And their second best player isn't Theo f***ing Ratliff.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (ZoomSlowik @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 08:05 PM)
That Sixers' team had a point differential of 4.3. The Bulls were at 7.3 last year. And their second best player isn't Theo f***ing Ratliff.

 

Theo Ratliff was traded mid-season for Mutombo. A 4-time DOPY and the modern day Bill Russell. I'm sorry. The rosters don't look that much different to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 08:09 PM)
Theo Ratliff was traded mid-season for Mutombo. A 4-time DOPY and the modern day Bill Russell. I'm sorry. The rosters don't look that much different to me.

Yes but your view is skewed. Its actually kind of fun to watch you underrate the Bulls every season now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ Dec 13, 2011 -> 08:09 PM)
Theo Ratliff was traded mid-season for Mutombo. A 4-time DOPY and the modern day Bill Russell. I'm sorry. The rosters don't look that much different to me.

 

Mutombo played 26 games for them that year.

 

Again, the Bulls point differential was 3 points better. That's a HUGE difference and the reason that was the only year the Sixers won 50 with AI.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...