RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Being the best team and having the most stars are two different things. The clippers and knicks arguably have more star power than we do. Yet they're not a better team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Knicks are created terribly with Amara/Melo. Clippers have arguably the worst coach in the NBA. The Bulls have good talent, probably better than those teams, but the Bulls need to beat the Heat, not hope that some how the Heat lose to another team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:10 PM) Reading is fundamental. After Rose was injured this season, AFTER ROSE WAS INJURED, the Bulls should have limited his minutes. That is not the rest of his career, that is if he keeps getting injured in the same season, maybe you shouldnt play him 40+ minutes in his first game back. That is not rocket science. And I showed you in the previous thread they did, aside from a select close games. Hell, playing 38 minutes is effectively sitting your star player all but 2 minutes of the fourth quarter. So get on your fundamental science rocket and quit using your own idea of limiting minutes as a reason thibs should move on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:12 PM) They can still do it though. You keep going back to the Cavs as if them not having won a title justifies your logic that they never would have. Seems like a post hoc fallacy to me. Again, the Bulls management knows that they need to put a legit 2nd star next to Rose before he's tool old. They know it, I'm sure they know every point that's been made in this entire thread. Nobody can tell me they think they know more about basketball than coach Thibs. And nobody can tell me that they know more about GMing them our GM. I wasn't the one arguing that the #1 seed actually means something. All I'm saying that we have 4 very recent examples of a #1 seed not even making it out of their conference. Sure, Cleveland MAY have eventually pulled one out, but it likely would have required some kind of miraculous trade or draft pick that reduced their reliance on Lebron. I'm confused now, are you arguing for them to keep the band together or not? On the one hand you keep saying that this team is good enough as is, on the other you're saying they know they need to add another star. Which one is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:18 PM) And I showed you in the previous thread they did, aside from a select close games. Hell, playing 38 minutes is effectively sitting your star player all but 2 minutes of the fourth quarter. So get on your fundamental science rocket and quit using your own idea of limiting minutes as a reason thibs should move on. Right because players play 48 minutes per game during the regular season? What was the highest Average MPG in the NBA last year? Loul Deng 39.4 How many players averaged more than 38 minutes? 5 So you think its defensible that Rose was being asked to play a full workload even being injured? You are defending Rose being played as many minutes as the top 5 guys, while injured, that makes no sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I wasn't the one arguing that the #1 seed actually means something. All I'm saying that we have 4 very recent examples of a #1 seed not even making it out of their conference. Sure, Cleveland MAY have eventually pulled one out, but it likely would have required some kind of miraculous trade or draft pick that reduced their reliance on Lebron. I'm confused now, are you arguing for them to keep the band together or not? On the one hand you keep saying that this team is good enough as is, on the other you're saying they know they need to add another star. Which one is it? I think this team was good enough to win a title had they had good health to their core players. This team is like a well-oiled machine. Take cogs out of that machine, and the machine weakens. This team is completely reliant on great PG production and excellent front court rebounding and defense. We've had injuries to main pieces both years this group was together, that prevented us from playing our best in the post season. Due to health issues and financial matters, this teams window is drawing to a close. The only question now is to proceed with caution or blow it up in a hurry. I think the Bulls know they need to put a younger, more athletic core around Rose now to help him. But going all in on a Dwight Howard rental is not the course they've chosen to pursue. I agree with them on that. There will be many more opportunities in the future to improve this team, so let's not fret about it too much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 Demetri McCamey is on the Bulls summer league roster Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:14 PM) Being the best team and having the most stars are two different things. The clippers and knicks arguably have more star power than we do. Yet they're not a better team. I didn't say more stars, I said more talent. Amare Stoudemire might be a "star" by some definitions, but he's not as good as Westbrook, Wade or probably either of LA's big men (or arguably Bosh, who is also less injury prone). The Clippers and Knicks also have zero solidly above average players combined outside of some flashes from Lin, and most of them are below. That's not the case with the Heat, Thunder or Lakers (well, only because Nash is there in that case). Edited July 12, 2012 by ZoomSlowik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:25 PM) Right because players play 48 minutes per game during the regular season? What was the highest Average MPG in the NBA last year? Loul Deng 39.4 How many players averaged more than 38 minutes? 5 So you think its defensible that Rose was being asked to play a full workload even being injured? You are defending Rose being played as many minutes as the top 5 guys, while injured, that makes no sense. Did Rose average 38 MPG after he returned from injury, everytime? No, i dont believe he did. Did he play some games where he approached or passed 38MPG? Yes, he did. You act as if Thibs sent him out for 48 MPG, not me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:35 PM) Demetri McCamey is on the Bulls summer league roster yay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 No Im not, youre the one who argued the fact Thibs didnt play him 48 minutes was "resting" him. The fact is, when Thibs put him out for over 38 minutes, he seemed to get injured. You would think after that happened the first time, they would have been more careful. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) No Im not, youre the one who argued the fact Thibs didnt play him 48 minutes was "resting" him. The fact is, when Thibs put him out for over 38 minutes, he seemed to get injured. You would think after that happened the first time, they would have been more careful. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. To me this says how badly this team needed a better back up PG than C.J. Watson. I'm betting a lot of those games, Thibs felt like he had to put Rose back in because C.J. wasn't cutting it. Our team needs great PG production, what are you gonna do? Edited July 12, 2012 by RZZZA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 09:04 PM) While the injury has changed things, on the other side of that coin...where would this franchise be without the extremely lucky lottery win of Derrick Rose? Which was pretty much as big of a fluke as his torn ACL. So with his injury you are just about looking at the roster they would have assembled. The only reason this franchise is at all in any sort of title contention is because of that lottery, which doesn't exactly inspire further faith in their ability to make decisions. The amount of times things like that have happened in the NBA is startling. Counting on an amount of luck if you are a good franchise and bad luck if you are a bad one should be factored into your decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (RZZZA @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:30 PM) I think this team was good enough to win a title had they had good health to their core players. This team is like a well-oiled machine. Take cogs out of that machine, and the machine weakens. This team is completely reliant on great PG production and excellent front court rebounding and defense. We've had injuries to main pieces both years this group was together, that prevented us from playing our best in the post season. Due to health issues and financial matters, this teams window is drawing to a close. The only question now is to proceed with caution or blow it up in a hurry. I think the Bulls know they need to put a younger, more athletic core around Rose now to help him. But going all in on a Dwight Howard rental is not the course they've chosen to pursue. I agree with them on that. There will be many more opportunities in the future to improve this team, so let's not fret about it too much. So basically you think they need to make changes like everyone else in the thread that you've been arguing with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) So basically you think they need to make changes like everyone else in the thread that you've been arguing with. I was only arguing against what Sox Badger said today. oh, and a little with you, but only because you said #1 seed doesn't matter and I disagreed with that. Edited July 12, 2012 by RZZZA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:42 PM) The amount of times things like that have happened in the NBA is startling. Counting on an amount of luck if you are a good franchise and bad luck if you are a bad one should be factored into your decisions. Right, and the winning the lottery for Rose and the tearing or Rose's ACL are about as equally improbable, thus a wash. I wasn't saying that Rose should be taken out of the equation, but you can't mention that the front office got unlucky and look bad because of his injury when the only reason they looked good in the first place with him was pure luck as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:38 PM) No Im not, youre the one who argued the fact Thibs didnt play him 48 minutes was "resting" him. The fact is, when Thibs put him out for over 38 minutes, he seemed to get injured. You would think after that happened the first time, they would have been more careful. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me. No, I said he was resting him up to 10 minutes a game. Almost sitting him an entire quarter. its fine, you dont like Thibs for silly reasons. You are wrong, I am fine with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bmags Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (WHarris1 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 09:44 PM) Right, and the winning the lottery for Rose and the tearing or Rose's ACL are about as equally improbable, thus a wash. I wasn't saying that Rose should be taken out of the equation, but you can't mention that the front office got unlucky and look bad because of his injury when the only reason they looked good in the first place with him was pure luck as well. No argument. I mean, yes. They aren't an elite front office. I do think they are a bit above average, though, but conservative. I think their issue is they don't look at the nba championships as their god-given right the way the LAs and Bostons do and with our history there's no reason we shouldn't. That said, I just don't think trading for howard would work out. But next off-season I want there to be fireworks. I mostly just want to tread water until I see something interesting, the most interesting thing about this offseason was PGs, so, not really helpful. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I actually think getting a better back up PG rotation will be hugely important to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyyle23 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:49 PM) No argument. I mean, yes. They aren't an elite front office. I do think they are a bit above average, though, but conservative. I think their issue is they don't look at the nba championships as their god-given right the way the LAs and Bostons do and with our history there's no reason we shouldn't. That said, I just don't think trading for howard would work out. But next off-season I want there to be fireworks. I mostly just want to tread water until I see something interesting, the most interesting thing about this offseason was PGs, so, not really helpful. My biggest problem is they project this possibility every season, and it never happens. It is always "well they could have tried to trade for KobeGarnettGasolHoward etc, but it never would have worked out. Sometimes you have to roll the dice and see. Sometimes it works out(08 Celtics) sometimes it falls flat on its face(Knicks with Amare and Melo). At the very worst, the Bulls would be left with Rose and a hell of a lot of money to play with. At the very best, Howard flips and decides Chicago isnt so bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHarris1 Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 QUOTE (bmags @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:49 PM) No argument. I mean, yes. They aren't an elite front office. I do think they are a bit above average, though, but conservative. I think their issue is they don't look at the nba championships as their god-given right the way the LAs and Bostons do and with our history there's no reason we shouldn't. That said, I just don't think trading for howard would work out. But next off-season I want there to be fireworks. I mostly just want to tread water until I see something interesting, the most interesting thing about this offseason was PGs, so, not really helpful. Fair enough, I agree with that for the most part. The way I see it, while it doesn't have to be this offseason, soon enough there is going to have to be some risks taken because a 2nd star is absolutely essential to the contention for a championship for the foreseeable future. It's not necessarily the end of the world that it didn't happen this summer, but I sometimes question whether GarPax has what it takes to make the 2nd star happen in ANY offseason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ZoomSlowik Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 I just want to see a better SG at some point. They're going to have a very tough time if we keep seeing their wing players brick open 3's like they did in the 2010-2011 Heat series, especially since Miami got better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 If you accept that a healthy version of this team cannot win in their second go-around in the deep playoffs, what is the plan of action? How do you manage the roster now? You can't create an amazing, star-studded core out of thin air. Going for Howard would be risky and would cost you a lot of talent and cause you to take on older, more highly paid players along with him. Then you may lose Howard and keep those contracts for yet another season. So what's your move, GMs? Whether you accept the proposed or not, I just don't see a reason not to keep last year's team as together as possible. Certainly makes sense to try to avoid luxury tax though. If Rose returns and is healthier than what some would think, you get this team's second chance to win a title. If not, then it's not as if there was something to get this year anyway. Like basically every team except perhaps the Heat, some things have to go right for this team to win. If an idiot could assemble a winning team, teams like Charlotte wouldn't be so bad. Be happy that many would have argued that we had the second best team in the NBA. If something goes right - Derrick gets even more dominant, Boozer has a career year, Rip experiences a revival, Noah learns to play offense, LeBron breaks a leg, etc - we win. This is how sports work and especially one like the NBA. You have to get a little lucky. Hell, even the Heat were lucky to be able to clear all that cap room to get those 3 assholes. Something will go right and we'll win or things stay the same and we'll be pretty good. Or we can dismantle and hope that a ton of s*** goes right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxbadger Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ Jul 12, 2012 -> 03:44 PM) No, I said he was resting him up to 10 minutes a game. Almost sitting him an entire quarter. its fine, you dont like Thibs for silly reasons. You are wrong, I am fine with that. I love how you think someone can be wrong on a subjective statement. Me: This pizza is the best pizza Ive ever had. Kyle: No it isnt. Me: Yes it is, the sauce is amazing, the crust is crisp and the cheese is good. Kyle: Youre wrong and silly! Classic. Edited July 12, 2012 by Soxbadger Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RZZZA Posted July 12, 2012 Share Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) If you pin your hopes on trading for a superstar, that window hasn't closed for us yet. Our most attractive trade pieces (Deng and Noah) are still on bargain contracts and performing at a level that makes them appealing, and will do so for the foreseeable future. Who could we have gotten so far? Lebron and Wade, that was never feasible because they colluded to go to Miami Melo, he was never thought of highly by this FO and I don't blame them. We would have had to trade Deng and Noah for him. Dwight? This FO would happily trade for Dwight but the dumbass doesn't want to be here. Not their fault. Edited July 12, 2012 by RZZZA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts