Busting the Luol Deng Myths
by YaoPau on Dec 14, 2008 1:05 AM CST
Email
Print
Points per 48 minutes last year in close and late ("clutch") situations:
Ben Gordon: 42.0
Luol Deng: 14.7
Why did we give Luol the huge extension?
This year, Deng is having his worst season. Yet of all the Rebuilding Ideas posted on this site, I haven't seen one that's called for the immediate trade of Deng, when that's the only way to really improve our team without clearing loads of salary for free agency. It begs another question, why all the love for Deng?
It seems like his nice-guy, hard-working, smart-player image is clouding that fact that he's a below average starting small forward. A few Luol Deng Myths need to be busted.
MYTH #1: Luol Deng is and will be a good #2 or #3 option for a long time.
FACT: If Deng's our #2 or #3 option, we aren't winning a title.
Earlier this year, while watching Rasho Nesterovic pick us apart, I figured out what separated our Bulls from the 2004 Pistons (the team we hoped our Bulls would become), and that difference is Takeover Players.
takeover player, n. - 1. A player who has the ability to - at any moment in the game, against any team in the league - put his team on his back, become the go-to guy offensively, and lead his team on a run.
The Pistons had three takeover players: Chauncey Billups, Rip Hamilton, and Rasheed Wallace. All three could work in isolation and put 10 points on you before you blinked. All three could put up 25 on a given night and it wouldn't surprise you. And you were a Detroit fan, you wouldn't have a problem putting the ball in any of their hands in crunch time.
Without a superstar scorer, three takeover players seems to be the magic number. Looking back at recent NBA Championship teams, they either had a superstar scorer (25+ ppg, .55+ TS%, can score consistently in isolation, clutch) and a takeover player, or three takeover players.
Lakers: Shaq (superstar), Kobe (superstar)
Heat: Wade (superstar), Shaq (takeover)
Spurs: Duncan, Parker, Ginobili (three takeovers)
Pistons: Billups, Hamilton, R. Wallace (three takeovers)
Celtics: Pierce, Garnett, Allen (three takeovers)
Deng, though, is not a takeover player. His game relies on exploiting defensive lapses. Leave him open on the wing and he'll catch and shoot a quick 18 footer. Turn your back on him off the ball and he'll cut to the hole for an easy layup.
The problem with that type of game, though, is it's easy to defend. Keep a body near Deng and you shut him down. He has no post game, he isn't quick enough to make space for himself or drive to the hole, and as a result he has virtually no isolation scoring in his game. That's why you get the 14.7pp48 in crunch time. When defenses lock down at the end of games, Deng is nothing but a decoy.
For further proof, here's the breakdown of assisted baskets from our supposed first three options:
1. Gordon - 40.7% of his buckets are assisted.
2. Rose - 35.1%
3. Deng - 75.6%
And if you look back at the list of top clutch scorers you'll see that nearly all of them have low assisted % numbers. You have to be able to create on your own to takeover a game.
(For those that are thinking about Rip Hamilton and Reggie Miller as exceptions, you're right. Both were catch and shoot players and clutch studs. But they also moved relentlessly off the ball which allowed them to exploit/create defensive lapses regardless of the situation. I'd be interested to see Luol play this way, though he never has.)
That makes Luol a fourth option on a Championship Team. He's a role player that needs to be surrounded by other, more talented scorers to be effective late in games.
MYTH #2: Luol Deng is a good shooter.
FACT: Luol Deng is a poor shooter who hurts the Bulls by shooting so often.
Remember the good old days two years ago when Luol seemingly made every 18 footer he took? Well the stats just don't back that up.
Luol's career 47.6 FG% has made us believe he's one of the best midrange shooters in the league, when in reality his high FG% is mostly due to his knack for finishing around the basket. When he's taking jumpshots, the numbers are ugly.
eFG% of Deng's Jumpshots (eFG% accounts for the extra point from making a 3):
2005-2006: 38.4%
2006-2007: 42.6%
2007-2008: 40.6%
2008-2009: 36.1%
For comparison, here's the eFG% for Larry Hughes' Jumpshots:
2005-2006: 39.9%
2006-2007: 41.4%
2007-2008: 39.9%
2008-2009: 51.7%
Those percentages are almost exactly equal! Now let's look at the jumpshot percentages for a good shooter, Ben Gordon:
2005-2006: 50.1%
2006-2007: 51.4%
2007-2008: 50.4%
2008-2009: 50.4%
Wait, who did we give the huge contract extension to?
heyluoldengpleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com is still available...
MYTH #3: Luol Deng is an Above-Average Starting Small Forward
Fact: Luol Deng is in the Bottom Half.
Let's put aside Luol's 4th quarter disappearing acts and poor jumpshooting, and just focus on the two basic Hollinger numbers: PER and True Shooting Percentage. And we'll see how Luol stacks up to the other NBA starting small forwards.
Name: '08 PER, '08 TS%; '07 PER, '07 TS%
LeBron James: 32.7, .583; 29.1, .568
Caron Butler: 22.3, .575; 20.7, .558
Paul Pierce: 17.0, .562; 19.6, .599
Danny Granger: 18.9, .572; 16.7, .571
Carmelo Anthony: 17.6, .517, 21.1, .568
Andrei Kirilenko: 20.0, .597; 17.2, .603
Rudy Gay: 16.3, .520; 17.5, .547
Gerald Wallace: 16.3, .532, 17.5, .548
Shawn Marion: 16.3, .505; 19.2, .570
Corey Maggette: 15.7, .550; 19.3, .595
Josh Howard: 17.5, .521; 18.3, .534
Tayshaun Prince: 16.0, .522; 15.6, .516
Lamar Odom: 14.1, .557; 16.9, .582
Richard Jefferson: 14.0, .537; 17.4, .571
Hedo Turkoglu: 13.7, .497; 17.8, .576
Ron Artest: 13.8, .474; 18.8, .535
Luol Deng: 13.3, .494; 17.0, .528
There are 16 SF's names listed there next to Luol's, and Luol doesn't have a clear advantage over any of them. That's already over half the league, and I didn't include up-and-comers Thaddeus Young, Michael Beasley, Jamario Moon, John Salmons, and Travis Outlaw, all of whom have better numbers than Luol this season.
So why did we give a 4th option, below average SF who lacks a jumpshot and disappears in crunch time a 6 year, $71 million extension? Who knows. But we have to stop looking at Deng as a future star and get him shipped off for an actual takeover player immediately. Because Deng still has trade value...
THE OUTLOOK: How to Build the Bulls into a Contender
Step 1: Sign Ben Gordon to an extension, and make sure Larry Hughes and Drew Gooden never sniff an extension contract.
We've already got one takeover player (Rose) locked up for the next four years. Let's lock up our second takeover player, pronto. Takeover players are rare, and if Gordon asks for $13 mil, give it to him.
After that, the best option for a Bulls rebuild is still through 2010 Free Agency. There are too many huge stars to not at least put ourselves in position to make a play. But there may be ways we can rid ourselves of Luol's contract while adding a 3rd takeover player before 2010.
Step 2: Free up cash while adding a potential 3rd takeover player by trading Luol.
Would the T'Wolves trade their #1 pick along with Jason Collins and Brian Cardinal for Luol and Tyrus? Maybe (and 7'1" freshman BJ Mullens looks like a blue chipper).
Would the Grizzlies trade Rudy Gay (33.7pp48 in the clutch last year, 35% of buckets assisted), Antoine Walker, and Darko Milicic for Luol and Hinrich? With the poor Gayo/Mayo chemistry, it's possible.
Either trade would give the Bulls cap space for 2010 and the possibility of three takeover players on their roster before then. A core of Rose, Gordon and Gay attracts free agents.
Step 3: Dump enough contracts to make a play in 2010, and try like hell to land a big name.
FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.
444 comments
|
30 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Rec'd
I find it ridiculous how often Luol gets defended on this site and usually the main defense is that his contract is the standard rate for a player like him. I totally don’t buy it. The guy should have been traded when he had value. A good gm could have seen what kind of talent this guy was.
Everything you said can be summed up simply by saying: he’s a $71 mil. player that can’t crate his own shot. Has that ever happened before? Other than maybe a stud defensive center or something like that, has there ever been another wing player in the league making this kind of money that couldn’t create a shot? Every single time he tries, he looks like a fool, dribbling off his feet or turning the ball over. When he gets the ball it kills our entire offensive flow for the next five possessions. Not to mention the sad sack look he has on his face all game.
You can see why BG is so upset, he can’t believe that a scrub like that is gonna make more money than him. Just look at Danny Granger. Same position, Luol’s making MORE money and Granger is a FAR superior player. I don’t get it. This post is placed perfectly, cause it comes directly after the guy that’s defending Pax. This contract is the main reason why he’s gotta go.
by Juiceboxjerry on Dec 14, 2008 1:25 AM CST reply actions 1 recs
Good post but just one thing
The reason no ones throwing luol deng into trades is because….ITS IMPOSSIBLE TO TRADE HIM ATM. HE HAS THE BIGGEST FREAKIN CONTRACT ON THIS TEAM, WITH THE MOST YEARS. IT would be a hellava lot easier to trade both noch and hughes than it would be to trade deng.
By the time rose’s contract extension comes along you will definetly start seeing the “Dang! Trade Deng!” rants, until then we are definetly stuck with him. If we are lucky, luol will get better and fit more into the system, if not…well someone should want him cuz he is still a solid sf.
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, Bullshooter, and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light....
yup, that's the real 'busted myth'
Deng’s here to stay. He’s having a bad start to the season, and was mediocre last year. It’s an issue, but I don’t doubt he’ll be fine.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 2:04 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
I lambast Luol because I’ve often felt Ben Gordon was our best player, and found it strange taht Luol got all the love, whereas Gordon got all the mire….you’re stat above in the crunch time minutes said it all…..and that was quite a feat for BG to do when he’d have 2-3 guys on him and all 4 other Bulls standing and not moving in Skiles’s motionless-motion offense (drive and kick with 2 people playing offense and 3 people standing around watching)….
But I think this is a bit too harsh on Luol. He is an above avg SF, he’ll just never be a top 5 because of the lack of athleticism in a position that often features the most athletic players on a team. He is a decent (not great, but better than just ok defender) and he is typically a consistent 15-18 pts per game, low turnover, ok rebounds do everything kind of player. He’s a consistent 2-3 option, is young, has a high bball IQ, and has started off this season terribly before getting his grip the last few games.
He won’t kill us, but again given the needs I don’t know if he was as important to us to shore up for so long when he’s also not a guy who’ll take us to the next level. If we didn’t have to worry about Gordon, I would have liked Luol’s contract a bit more, but Gordon now isn’t signed and might just leave us and Luol’s contract will get more and more irritating by the day….
Not a bad player at all, generally worth much of his contract, but also not deserving all the undo love on BaB and by Bulls fans that he’s received while everyone else has been attacked at some point on BaB.’
Good post though and you get a rec
Yeah, until we got our Point God, Ben was our best player.
But Ben was short which instantly made him a bad defender even though he’s really an average defender. For some reason though, Luol got all the love. The only time I’ve ever seen Luol take over a game was the Miami series. Ben takes over the game on a regular basis and is much better than Luol.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 15, 2008 5:26 PM CST up reply actions
Luol Deng has consistently been the Bulls best adjusted plus minus performer the last couple years
and even this year in a down year in boxscore statistics and even by the eye test, he is still leading the team. Numbers here. Granted, the numbers are noisy, but given Deng’s past history, it’s not unlikely that he really is the best APM contributor on this team. APM is really the only stat that covers all of the little things a player does. I’ve never really bought the whole “takeover” players theory. Points scored at the beginning of games are just as important as points scored later in games or in “clutch”.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 1:44 AM CST reply actions
"Points scored at the beginning of games are just as important as points scored later in games or in "clutch"."
Tell that to LeBron James. It seems like we’re ahead by 5 points on the Cavs heading into the fourth quarter every time we play them, and we always lose. I’d go as far as to say the first three quarters mean jack shit as long as the game’s within single digits heading into the 4th.
There’s a reason why Mariano Rivera gets paid 10 million per year to pitch one inning per game. Being good in the clutch is the difference between good teams and championship teams.
then go up by more than 5 points to go into the 4th quarter
Luol needs better teammates to help build big leads to beat teams that have a “closer” (namely a better frontcourt, if TT and Noah play like they did last night… things are looking way up). The Bulls also have a closer, his name is Derrick Rose.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 11:03 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah. Deng's not LeBron. I think we get that.
Is that a “myth”, too?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
So Deng is more like a starting pitcher?
I can live with that.
by drew gooden's facial growth on Dec 14, 2008 12:42 PM CST up reply actions
If he returns to form
He’s a solid 7-8 inning pitcher.
by drew gooden's facial growth on Dec 15, 2008 1:09 PM CST up reply actions
Ha.
More like, a starting pitcher who we have to leave in till the 9th inning even though he’s got nothing left in the tank.
I'm not a numbers guy at all, but the plus/minus stat seems like crap to me.
I thought I heard that Noc is our best player according to that. Forget about the whole “clutch” thing, what about just having a player that is difficult to defend? Deng basically guards himself.
by Juiceboxjerry on Dec 14, 2008 1:56 AM CST up reply actions
regular +/- is crap as it doesn't account for teammate effects, but adjusted plus minus is helpful
it mathematically eliminates teammate effects.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 11:04 AM CST up reply actions
I tend to agree, but let me offer an alternative hypothesis
APM revolves around the alternative guys you can put on the court.
Carlos Boozer is a heck of a player, but, for example, his APM’s always look iffy because if he misses time, he’s replaced by AK-47 and Paul Milsap, who are also very good players.
When Deng has missed time, he’s generally been replaced by a big helping of Noc, who’s a noted negative nelly in the plus-minus department.
In short, Deng’s largely positive APM is probably highly correlated to Noc’s largely negative APM.
This makes pretty good sense in observational terms. Deng’s going to get the statistical benefit because, although he’s not very athletic, he can competently guard his positions against most players and Nocioni can’t against most players.
The end result of this is that Deng’s high APM overestimates his value because when he comes off the court he’s replaced by a very iffy defender. If we’d been replacing Deng with, say, Rudy Gay for the last two years, my guess is Deng’s APM would have dropped precipitously.
De gustibus non est disputandum
that's where the "A = adjusted" part of APM comes in.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Point is, it's adjusted, not eliminated
Especially when you’re talking about two guys that have only played on the same team for 5 years, you’re not exactly pulling your data from a random distribution.
De gustibus non est disputandum
well Noc was actually a good contributor for a number of those years
so it’s not really that valid of a point anyway. He stinks now, sure, but he used to be a pretty good player, especially coming off the bench.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 1:40 PM CST up reply actions
No, and it's obviously not perfect.
I’m still waiting for that one stat that sums up and perfectly ranks players. Maybe yours does.
Besides, before this year, Nocioni has hardly been horrible in total. From what I can tell, he’s been pretty much… average.
So I guess if Duncan or Garnett or James had better backups, they wouldn’t be the best players in the league according to AP/M? I think you’re seriously underestimating the work that has gone into “adjusting” plus-minus.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
BTW...
…what does “it’s adjusted, not eliminated” mean? I know you don’t have access to the formulas they use, so you can’t say where they’ve gone wrong. The “adjusted” part refers to the plus-minus part and intends to do exactly that: completely ELIMINATE the effect of teammates on the stat. You might be safe in assuming that they didn’t succeed, especially in the specific case of Deng and Nocioni, but without access to the statistical formulas, or at least a working APM of your own that proposes to do the same thing and comes up with a different list, I don’t think you can say so matter-of-factly that they didn’t succeed. Maybe they didn’t. Maybe they did.
Point is, though, they created the adjusted plus-minus numbers to ELIMINATE the effect teammates had on the raw number.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Actually the formulas are right out there
Eli Witus shows you how to do it step by step in Excel. He also links to Dan’s posts describing the formulas and theory behind them in detail
I can say where they go wrong because I spent a fair amount of time in grad school studying such things.
And to be more specific, I’m not suggesting that they went “wrong”. I’m simply pointing out that the tool they’re using, combined with the limited data they have available, is not going to give a super robust answer. The teammate effect can be reduced, but it can’t be eliminated, even if you write it in all caps.
De gustibus non est disputandum
just as an aside you studied economics in grad school I'd guess right?
did you focus on econometrics?
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:08 PM CST up reply actions
Good guess :P
No, I didn’t focus on econometrics though. Basically just had a semester of that and a semester of mathematical modeling, and then whatever was incidental in other classes.
De gustibus non est disputandum
what was your focus on? did you get a Master's or a PhD in Econ?
I’m curious because I majored in Econ and Poli Sci in undergrad and I’m in law school now and considering whether I made the right choice of law school over grad school for econ. In fact, I should be studying for my Torts final right now, but Bulls basketball seems more compelling.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
nope W&M in Virginia.
Didn’t have the LSAT scores for UChicago so I didn’t apply there.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:19 PM CST up reply actions
Still a good school
Your interest in Law and Econ is why I asked.
by drew gooden's facial growth on Dec 14, 2008 5:22 PM CST up reply actions
yeah, I think they are both fascinating and I really like the
intersection between them. Although I tend to lean to the left, I still think that some of the points Posner makes make a lot of sense, but I don’t always agree with him. I’m also pretty interested in Behavioral Economics, but this is getting way off topic, so I’ll pull back before I get flagged for alec-like behavior.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:24 PM CST up reply actions
Heh, send me an email if you're more interested
But to sum up.
- I did exactly the thing you’re considering. I went to law school and did ok but decided I didn’t like it at all. Keep studying though, at most places your credits will transfer.
- I’ve got an ABD. Having kids is a bitch. If you want a PhD, try to put off kids. Taking care of them made it hard, and I also realized I have very little inclination to be a full-time professor. I’m finding out lately I don’t have that much inclination to be a part-time professor either.
- I’m also a poly sci guy. You should really look into George Mason. That’s where I went- I specialized in public choice and law and econ, and they’re really top notch for that.
De gustibus non est disputandum
I was going to say I saw a ducky and a rabbit
Charley Brown
Wiliamsburg...one of the most beautiful areas I've ever seen!
Much nicer than Hampton where I stayed for about 5 years or so.
W&M = GREAT school!!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 19, 2008 3:04 PM CST up reply actions
That still doesn't address, however, that the data is from...
…last year, with data from the previous years included. And Nocioni hasn’t been a horrible player the past few years. Despite what I said, the proposition that Deng’s APM is inflated because he has a bad player substituting in for him is still unsubstantiated.
And further, using the example that if he had Gay replacing him, it wouldn’t be that much (which, while possibly technically accurate) is ridiculous since no SF has someone like Gay backing him. Are you suggesting that James would have a significantly lower APM if he had Gay backing him up than whatever he’s had behind him? Or Garnett if he hadn’t had Powe backing him up?
While I was wrong on the other part, you are wrong in degrading Deng in any significant manner because he had an average player backing him up.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Could you give me a theoretically reasonable way to weight the current year's values vs past years?
I know enough to know I can’t. Thus, I also know that attempting to do so is introducing some user-based uncertainty into the mix.
Second, simply consider what happens in your examples. One doesn’t need to get into the numbers. Lebron obviously has a large positive effect. And his teammates aren’t that great, so they lose, on net, when they aren’t on the court with him. If he had a better backup, who was on court when he was off, would it not be harder to tell who was contributing what? Careful observation of the data can help sort that out, but again, it doesn’t eliminate it.
Degrading? :) You don’t know the half of it. I called him up this morning and told him to get his punk ass over here and clean up my kid’s poop. And you bet your ass he did it.
Anyway, I just don’t think APM is the end all and be all.
De gustibus non est disputandum
Yeah, "degrading" is a bad word choice.
My theory for weighting? Most baseball projections do a 5-3-1 weighting. Seems to work fairly well for most seasons across the MLB “universe” of players.
What I do feel, is that this season is too early to have any real significance as indication of true ability. Plus, and this is obviously arguable, for a guy who’s offense is predicated on others creating his shot, or at least creating his own within the very flow of the offense, this new offense is still new and cluster-fucked for me to say that, really, anyone is horrible beyond repair at this point.
So about LeBron… since he’s obviously good, we can accept the APM on face value. But since Deng isn’t as explosive and media-hyped and awesome-looking, we should think less of the results of APM as it conerns him?
Still, you didn’t address why, if Deng’s APM is inflated because Nocioni is so terrible (I was actually looking at the 82games.com of previous seasons and not basketballvalue.com), why wouldn’t we assume that James’ or Garnett’s or someone’s APMs aren’t also inflated, but even moreso, because they had even worse backups?
Anyway, I don’t buy the argument. The correlation between high starter APM and “bad” backups just doesn’t seem to be there. For one example (among many), why are Amir Johnson, Rasheed Wallace and Jason Maxiell the highest APM guys from Detroit last year w/ Antonio McDyess still coming in positive? That’s actually a great counter-example to the Boozer one, if you ask me.
Is APM the end-all, be-all? No. But have you found anyone that has said that is? Sounds like a straw man if you ask me. Maybe the best statistical too, but not the sole way of evaluating a player.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
going to your point about Noc's effective vis a vis Deng
his APM from 05-06 was +0.28 (he was a net positive), in that same year Luol’s APM was + 7.57, in 06-07 he was a -2.72 and Deng was +5.58, last year he was a -1.15, and Deng was a +4.95. Noc has generally been a net negative yes, but he’s not really that been that bad that you can discount Deng’s APM which has been in the top 25 in the league last year and the year before that.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:15 PM CST up reply actions
Just to be clear, I'm not saying it's entirely wrong and Deng is worthless or anything
I’m just saying I think his huge APM is probably an overestimate of his absolute worth.
De gustibus non est disputandum
Right, and opinions are cool.
But you’ve merely offered a theory, and you accept it as “truth”. The are plenty of counter-examples to your Boozer comment. Like in Detroit, for one.
As a statistically-minded person, I would think you wouldn’t take a case example as proof of a theory. Run a correlation between between high APM’s and “bad” backups and let’s see what you come up with.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Bad backups aren't the significant issue with APM.
Rosenbaum’s said that over and over. It’s players that either always play together or players that never play together. Detroit’s starting lineup when it featured five guys playing 35+ minutes per game was a problem. Howard never playing with his backup Foyle was a huge problem. Since Nocioni has played PF along with Deng as much as he has without Deng. He doesn’t fit either distinction. APM did have issues with the Bulls backcourt because they same three players played just about every backcourt minute over 3+ years.
Good post
The Bulls success seemed mostly to come from the fact that they were putting out max effort when opponents were cruising. Re YP’s response below, using LeBron is a silly argument. Nobody can even slow him down. I also like APM as a guide. As HSCS frequently pointed out, the game’s played on both halves of the court. APM shows a player’s total influence, imo.
by California Al on Dec 14, 2008 2:40 PM CST up reply actions
Derrick Rose's +/- usually isn't too great but....
…. are you gonna tell me that he isn’t clearly the best player on our team?
And you give me a guy that shows up in the crunch time EVERYTIME before I take a first quarter Hall of Famer. Deng just seems to play terribly whenever the game hangs in the balance, with the exception of when we beat an old and beat up Miami Heat team in the playoffs a few years back and everybody fell in love with Deng.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:30 PM CST up reply actions
in terms of total contributions to the team,
at this point, no he’s not the best player on the D. His defense (50% of the game) is pretty bad. He’s clearly the best player on offense and plays decent D when he gets into a defensive stance, but most of the time he gets blown by and our interior defenders, with the exceptions of Tyrus and Noah, don’t do him any favors when he gets beaten.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 8:34 PM CST up reply actions
best player on the team*
got a little ahead of myself with the “D”
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 8:35 PM CST up reply actions
Man, what the f@#k ever!!!!
Derrick Rose is the most valuable player on our team and that’s the bottom line. Damn all that other bullsh!t you talkin’.
Later for all that crazy talk. When someone on our team wins the DPOY award then talk to me about how Rose isn’t the best player on the team because he doesn’t play any defense.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 10:07 PM CST up reply actions
Does anyone really think
Rose has reached most of his potential?
Rose will be playing much better defense in a year or two from now.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 14, 2008 10:32 PM CST up reply actions
I go back and forth whether or not VDN should hold Rose accountable on D
He doesn’t seem to at all. But considering he’s a sophomore playing NBA point guard at a near all-star level, he should keep Rose’s mind free from too much all at once.
At the same time, if he was aggressive, the guy could grab 3 steals a game and truly become a disruptor. Maybe that’s best left for seasons 3, 4, and 5.
as long as he's not 'unprofessional'
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 12:30 PM CST up reply actions
I think
the coaching staff is aware that Rose has some learning to do on D…..he’s just a rookie folks, making him accountable for soft D but vastly superior O skills than anyone else is a bit much.
He’s motivated and will improve defensively soon.
If we played five Derrick Rose's,
we could be the Warriors!
Yay!
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Imagining that scenerio
was fun….Imagine the knicks vs the bulls (with a starting five of d.rose, poohdini, mini lebron, point god, and ive run out of nicknames…) That would be one hell of a game.
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, Bullshooter, and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light....
Yeah, it's true.
We’d probably win most of our games, actually. drools
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
On BaB numbers are in the senior tranche
with actual on-court observations being in the equity tranche.
by messwiththebull on Dec 15, 2008 1:04 PM CST up reply actions
Yes, like how the teams try to get their non-scorers involved early
like the Bulls used to do with Cartwright. Why is this? Because they can’t score when defenses tighten and the game pressure mounts in the latter portions. That’s my belief at least and that’s why they’re called clutch scorers and clutch buckets. Scoring when the game is known to be on the line versus when the game is still wide open are two different animals. On an absolute value basis they’re the same, I agree, but sports aren’t about absolute values.
by messwiththebull on Dec 15, 2008 1:01 PM CST up reply actions
But review the list of clutch scorers again
Look at all the players fg. Ben has one of, if not, the worst fg among the leaders. Most players are 10% better than him. So to use this as praise for Ben, boo Deng isn’t really fair. Deng plays within himself, which is better than being Jamal Tinsley (who is in the top 10 or so with a low fg%).
And yes, Ben’s numbers come from being forced to take the ball in clutch situations. But forced is probably too strong a word given Gordon openly wants the ball in those situations.
Cartwright
thoguh was a scorer, he was a 20 pt scorer a few times and could give yopu 17-20 a night. THat’s not too shabby. The Bulls wanted to get him going as our scorer in the first so that they could conserve a bit of the Scottie/MJ o at the end…..Bill was a great guy to have to give the early edge.
He didn't need to be and shouldn't have been
With MJ and Pippen and Horace…..but Bill Cartwright COULD…..and that made him valuable.
Huh?
Actually they just worked the ball into him the first few times opening the game. That was really it.
by Johnny"B"ull on Dec 17, 2008 11:40 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
They worked the ball into him early because he could score and Bill did a great job early with energy, etc giving you 10-12 of his 13-14 pts int he first 15-18 minutes of the games. The rest of the game he focused on the elbows.
LOL
Those were the days….
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 18, 2008 12:58 PM CST up reply actions
So basically...
…you’re saying that if the Bulls just ignored Deng and instead went to Gordon, he’d be scoring something like 30 points per game or something.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
that's true.
the dominant teams in the league don’t thrive off “clutch” players – they thrive by blowing teams out of the water with their point differential. i.e. Celtics.
that..my friend...
is a rec’d fanpost. I totally agree with everything you said. 71 million dollars for a guy who doesnt do not one damn thing well. Being all around mediocre is not the same as being an all around player.
I just hate how
soft he is sometimes. 2nite he had a good dunk, but most times he looks shooked inside
"If there’s any haters in here right now that don’t have nobody to hate on, feel free to hate on me." - A.P.N.S.
Certainly recced, great post.
I do disagree on one thing, however: I’m not certain Luol has any value at present, so I don’t know whether it’s possible to trade him.
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
The way you compared Luol and Larry's eFG%
was pretty shocking stuff. I feel the same as when I was younger and my mom told me there was no Santa Claus. “What do you mean Luol isn’t a good jump shooter?”. Really good post.
great fanpost
the cowardly lion can’t create his own shot
Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.
-- Scottie Pippen
by Orlando Woolridge on Dec 14, 2008 10:19 AM CST reply actions
Here's one trade I could see happening:
Luol Deng (and Kirk) are both Larry Brown type players, and it seems like Larry is hell bent on ridding himself of Gerald Wallace…and everyone else in the vicinity. Wallace’s contract is basically the same as Luol’s. A straight-up swap might be doable, if the Bobcats decide not to go into pure salary-dump mode.
The benefit is primary defensive and in terms of athleticism. The drawback is that Wallace is 26, and isn’t quite the perimeter threat Deng has been. Although, if what you’re saying is true, it’s less of a strength than is commonly thought.
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
Makes absolute basketball sense,
but I could never see our dunce of a gm making a move like that. To trade Lu right now would basically be him admitting his own ineptitude, because he just signed the guy. Unfortunately, our Bulls are like the economy, and things are gonna have to get worse before they get better.
by Juiceboxjerry on Dec 14, 2008 10:48 AM CST up reply actions
agee Deng is overrated
I’m too lazy and don’t know how to find my posts, but I agree with you and have stated it before that I thought Deng had peaked and never understood where all this upside for Deng thinking was coming from. He is a SF with no 3pt range, post up game, or ability to create many shots off the dribble. He is a good player but you can’t pay good players like great players if you want to stay under cap and contend.
by NY Chicago Fan on Dec 14, 2008 10:53 AM CST reply actions
really? you never understood?
I’ll break it down: players don’t usually peak at 21
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 2:05 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I think we will find more and more do
these guys have been playing non-stop since such an early age that by time they are in NBA for a few years if they get lots of mins like Deng did I think more and more players will start to show their ceiling at younger age ….
Deng just didn’t show me anything to believe he would get better, he is a really hard worker but that is what got him to that level and can only take a player so far, I think his lack of good ballhandling skills really holds him back compared to many SFs
and I’ve never said Deng was bad draft choice, he is a good player, you can’t call it a mistake to have him on the team
by NY Chicago Fan on Dec 14, 2008 8:39 PM CST up reply actions
Deng hasn't been playing that long.
Between fleeing from a country at war to going to a country that is not known for basketball at all, Luol didn’t really start learning basketball until much later than most US kids these days. That seemed to be a major component in the evaluation from the “experts” that I read. Not only was he young, but he started later and was a hard worker, so things like getting better at 3’s and learning to score on the block were still possible. The problem is that he is now considered a vet on this team, instead of being developed, which he clearly still needs, IMO.
rec'd
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
busted! he's a 4th option
i’m disappointed in deng’s lack of improvement … after a great year two years ago (probably because no one bothered to guard him back then), he did not improve last year and has obviously regressed this year.
i’m still amazed sometimes of how we went 49-33 two years ago with a core of gordon-hinrich-deng (and nocioni off the bench). gordon can be a 3rd option. we need a #2 for rose to work with, preferably a big guy (like cp3’s dwest, dwill’s boozer),
I won't give up.....but at the rate he's playing it's not like he's making life easy on himself
Deng just doesn’t let his points come in the flow of the offense. Everyone knows his best strength on offense is cutting to the hoop and finishing close shots. It’s NOT his jumpshot. His jumpshot may have improved over the years, but it’s not his best offensive weapon. The problem is, how often do you see Deng cut to the basket? Frankly it’s as often as you see Tyrus or Noah roll to the rim. He only attempted 9 shots yesterday, that’s totally unacceptable for someone like Deng. He needs to be getting to the hoop consistently, either finishing or drawing fouls. I see that type of play from him maybe once a week so far.
The only thing that is keeping him respectable (in my mind) is his defense. It’s not Artest or Battier-level, but he plays solid D and gives his full effort on that end every game.
My hope was that with the emergence of Rose as a big-time player who isn’t afraid to take over a game, the pressure would finally be off of Deng and Gordon in the 4th. While BG is doing just great playing next to Rose, taking full advantage of not being the only deadly offensive weapon, Deng has yet to realize teams are concentrating more on stopping Rose than anyone else.
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 14, 2008 1:00 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
Deng is NOT a good defensive player!
He jumps around like a rabbit. Players blow past him with ease.
by Johnny"B"ull on Dec 14, 2008 8:36 PM CST up reply actions
please tell me you have some kind of statistic to further illuminate
like, net +/- per 100 possessions. Do you have those numbers handy?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 10:23 AM CST up reply actions
Well you know I do! ;)
I thought you didn’t like them. (Anyway, they haven’t been updated since the 11th. But I’ll be sure to get you the new numbers once they’re up.. ;) )
I don't think sarcasm
comes across too well on the internets.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Nope.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Noc
Often still gets caught when his teammates don’t switch, which makes Noc stand out like a sore thumb by being aggressive and forcing a switch that didn’t happen only to hack a foul to stop a play.
But Noc is playing terribly on both ends either way this year (very disappointing)….still his D isn’t nearly as bad as folks want to make it out to be because they watch him come in late against a guy and the guy flies past him…..
Absolutely!
I’ve seen Noc rotating properly and then someone else failing ro rotate to his man and then he tries to recover but obviously is too late. BG is often guilty of this. Just watching the Nets-game right now. Very interesting. And Deng is absolutely atrocious. He can’t play defense, doesn’t even block out. Can’t hit an open shot to save his life! Truly useless!
See I disagree
For every 1-2 horrible, oh my god why don’t BaBers blast him for the awful D Deng moments, he’ll make a few nifty D plays.
Deng can’t guard Rudy Gay…..and unfortunately family parties (too many of them these days) I didn’t see how he did against presumably Vince Carter, but Deng’s done a halfway decent D against most SF’s, and can demolish RJ for one….
But yeah all the Noc hate on D is a bit unfounded as he’s often caught in bad switches where other guys lose the fundamentals. Still Noc makes silly fouls,a nd this year has been extremely ineffective….I hope he bounces back.
I suggest you check out the Nets-game
Watch Deng’s “defence” on Vince. His funny attempt at dribbling one on one which he fumbles, and the missed open jumpers.
to be fair
deng’s matchup really should have been bobby simmons. vince is too quick for luol and it wasn’t a good matchup at all. problem is then that has ben on vince… which probably would have yielded at least the same results.
i know you and i agree mostly buddy, but i can’t agree with your hate on deng here.
Yes, I agree he should not have been on Vince
One of two things should have happened:
1. Our “Coach” or one of the asses on the bench should have noticed that and switched someone else onto him.
2. Deng should have told the coach himself. “Hey, coach, I can’t stay with this guy. We gotta figure something out”
I get that Vince is a tough cover. And I don’t really know who we put on him. Perhaps try Thabo?
I don’t really hate Deng. He’s just grossly overpaid. I’m a bit miffed about that. I’m sure he can be effective, but it’s not in a half-court set. He needs to be surrounded by better defenders when he plays (i.e TT, Noah) and get out and run. That is the ONE thing he is doing well right now. He crashed the boards and hit some lay-ups and dunks in the Nets game. Other than that he stunk it up. It all comes down to the coach and putting players in positions to succeed.
PS! I’ll try to not make a habit of disagreeing with you.. ;) (seems I disagree with most people on this board already ;) )
Another thing you can do
is NOT have Drew Gooden as your “Anchor” in the middle.
After Deng’s Matador defense there was no-one to pick up. Help-defense is sorta one of my “things” that I harp on when I coach.
true that
drew’s defense sucks. that’s why it’s so important to have a guy like ty out there whose help defense is so good. it’s possible deng did complain about it, but they chose to make him stick with it. also as noted he was playing through illness, probably slowing him down even more.
but yeah vince is a tough cover anyway, especially for someone who has no business guarding him in the first place. deng isn’t grossly overpaid, honestly. he’s not a max guy and he’s not being paid like one. he’s being paid like #2 or 3. which is what he is (despite this post saying he shouldn’t be). he’s been finding his groove so i hope he keeps it up.
Well....
I still say he’s overpaid. Until he seriously gets his act togheter.
But I wish him the best. He’s got the monster contract and we’re stuck with him for a while…
maybe a little
but considering what iguodala and okafor got, his contract was right on par with what i would expect.
that and i think he’ll bounce back. i just think it’s out of bounds to say he’s “grossly” overpaid – everyone acts like he’s getting max money when he isn’t.
At the time of the signing I only considered it
to be a mild overpaying. But the way he is playing now. He doesn’t seem to be dong many things well. He just seems so unathletic. He also needs to play more within himself and the coaches need to put him in positions where he can succeed. Uptempo, cutting to the basket, crashing the O-boards he can do pretty well. Hopefully. Just don’t try to dribble one-on-one cause that’s not his game.
true
he’s been struggling, but i think he’ll come out of it. but part of it is on the coaches to help him succeed in the new offense also. people forget the guy is only 23. he still needs instruction, especially since he hasn’t been able to find his own way yet. i think he’ll be fine though.
Agree.
If you search youtube, Noc has been posterized so many times.
Then I realized that the one doing the posterizing is almost always never Nocioni’s man.
DWade did it, and we know Noce is never put on DWade (that would be either Gordon or Hinrich on him). Carter did it too but Noce was on Jefferson that time and tried to help on Carter (yes, Deng was on Carter and he just looked on as his man posterized his teammate).
Ariza posterized Noce too (Deng was on him as well but Noce paid for it) and freaking Darko Milicic posterized Noce too (i don’t need to point out that, until this season, Noce doesn’t cover centers).
Maybe Noce should just allow Deng to get burned?
I think that is a redeeming Noc quality
he doesn’t care about getting dunked on like some players do. He’ll challenge the shot which is more than I can say for some guys on the team (ahem, Drew).
We should have given Noce the 72 million dollar contract
According to you Noce is just truly amazing, but gets letdown by his atrocious teammates who have the audacity to even be on the same floor as him. Just put Noce 1 against 5, he leads the Bulls in +/- dammit, he doesn’t need teammates!
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 15, 2008 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
It may come off like that
But that is prob more of a reaction to the seemingly unanimous Noce-hate that seems to be festering on this blog.
I DO realize he can’t go 1 on 5! Just don’t tell HIM that… ;)
The only myths I see are the way you present your points
close and late situation is an ok stat. But to just pull pts/48 doesn’t solve anything. Everyone knows Gordon takes significantly more shots and has more opportunities to attain those points. Not to mention they’re two totally different players. That is why they had success. BG needs the ball to be successful, Deng needs to work off the ball.
agreed, Gordon is shooting 37.7% from the field in those "clutch" situations
Deng on the other hand is shooting 43.5%. Just because Gordon takes more shots doesn’t mean he’s the better “clutch” player. Note: I think “clutch” is a useless fiction that doesn’t really have any meaning. Points are points are points. They all count. Get them more efficiently or prevent them from being scored and you win. Simple as that.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 3:19 PM CST up reply actions
You're argument is
that two free throws in the first quarter are just as important as two free throws in a 1 point game with 20 seconds left? I like reading your ideas on this site, but you’re way off on this one.
they all go on the scoreboard don't they? the only thing that changes is the context in which they are
viewed. If a guy misses a foul shot in the first half, no one really bats an eye. If he misses one to tie the game with 20 seconds left then he “choked.” He didn’t choke, he just missed a shot. It happens during the course of every game. The trick is to just be better over the course of the entire game.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:36 PM CST up reply actions
The trick is to be better when it counts
If your team is losing 21 to 22 in the first quarter and you miss two free throws, your team’s chances of winning (in theory, all things being equal) drop from a possible 51% to 49%.
If you team is losing 99 to 100 with five seconds left in the fourth quarter and you miss two free throws, your team’s chances of winning drop from 90% to 10%.
I know what you’re going to say – that if you made your free throws earlier you wouldn’t have to hit two clutch free throws – but to say that is to ignore human competitiveness. We aren’t computers, we’re animals that turn our games up when we’re playing below our expectations, and slack off when were’ playing above our expectations. This is deeper into it than I want to get, but by just saying every point counts the same, you’re ignoring a lot.
I know what you're saying
I’m just saying that I don’t really buy that Deng isn’t valuable simply because he’s not someone he takes a lot of shots in crunch time. He still provides valuable defense in crunch time usually on one of the opposing team’s best / better players and his game isn’t predicated on isolation, he’s simply not a good enough dribbler. He’s still very valuable and he provides enough over the course of the game to make him worthwhile on the team. Does this team need more players that can isolate and score at will? Sure, but every team needs those players, but they don’t exactly grow on trees. We have one in Rose and another who can sometimes do that sort of thing (Ben), although I prefer it when Ben doesn’t go iso, because he tends to turn the ball over a lot in crunch time when he runs clear outs and isolation plays for himself. Basically, my contention is that Deng is quite a good player, and you disagree. There’s not much reconciling to be done between the viewpoints. I just think you’re overemphasizing the importance of “clutch” situations, and as CJ has pointed out you cherry picked a lot of your data to paint Deng in the worst light possible.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:12 PM CST up reply actions
I agree with your main point
You cant have a bunch of guys who want to take the last shot, you need to have a balanced offense. The bulls have gordon as a clutch player ( i guess, but id disagree) and more importantly now have rose. Adding deng to the mix is just one more mouth to feed, and can disrupt the offense in the clutch. Dengs role is (as i believe) our number one scorer for hte majority of the game. Deng was intented to be our little way around having a low post presence, due to his ability to score many points in a high fg% constantly. If he can do that for the first 3 quarters of the game, that would be enough, gordon and deng can carry us home (if deng does his job correctly, they wont have to really carry us, but just finish the game for us).
That to me is a very important role, just as big as being the guy who can score in the last minutes of the game. Deng, nor gordon are completely players. And thats one of the irks i have about dengs money, and what gordon will be wanting…but on the bright side, d-rose is the only bull who most likely will become a complete player. No matter what quarter, no matter what end, no matter what situation, he will contribute in huge ways.
On Behalf of Sue, Wjb, Bullshooter, and all the other Hinrich fans...Ill keep the Hinrich Hope coming...There will be light....
I'm pretty sure this is what keeps Matt up at night
One group of people complaining that Deng disappears in the fourth while another group is bemoaning that he’ll need to get his in crunch time…
sigh
--Torch
It wouldn't make me upset if he'd get his in crunch time
he just doesn’t. My contention is that there’s nothing wrong with that. He’s efficient scoring throughout the rest of the game and still brings the D in crunch time. Let the high usage guys worry about carrying the team (mostly let Derrick Rose do what he does).
by fundamentallysound on Dec 15, 2008 7:13 PM CST up reply actions
Thinking clutch is fictional...
….is something a loser who is NOT clutch would say. The cream rises to the top when it counts the most. Damn the numbers. Let your eyes be your guide. Gordon is a FAR superior performer than Deng is when it counts for something.
But since you wanna talk about percentages, no doubt part of BG’s percentage being that low is that the defense KNOWS they can sag off Deng because he’s useless. So they pay extra attention to BG which makes what he’s done even more impressive.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:39 PM CST up reply actions
haha
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 8:58 PM CST up reply actions
yeah
But Gordon’s 37.7% in the clutch comes from having 2-3 guys on him, whereas Deng gets mostly open looks since he moves so little int he 4th. That’s always been a big criticism of Luol.
Having another playmaker for Gordon should bring up BG’s %’s….
And to him who said BG is a 3rd option, he could be, but he’s more a 2nd option. We need some easy scores to relieve some pressure down low to help our guards….if we had that we’d be fine.
BG takes those shots because....
…nobody else is willing to. Gordon has been the only viable option we’ve had down the stretch. Deng is completely useless and Hinrich would at least try but was nowhere near as effective as Gordon. Now we have Rose who is capable and we even get some help from Hughes now. But Deng has had EVERY OPPORTUNITY to come up big. He just does not and that’s the bottom line!!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:36 PM CST up reply actions
When I just drafted a superstar point guard,
I prefer to have players around him score a large % of points off of assisted baskets.
You also forgot to include cluth field goal percentages
Gordon 38%
Deng 44%
It's convenient to take Luol's worst career season, not to mention only 21 games in
to compare PER. What you are doing is essentially fudging the numbers to bend to your point.
Take any season!!!
I posted on here about 2 years ago and named about 10 or 12 small forwards who were better than Deng. That list has gotten longer since then.
Man people, come off it. Deng is JUST ALRIGHT!! VERY AVERAGE!! I have no doubt that we could find another guy who can give us everything he does. Hell C.J. i don’t know you, but you may be able to give us what he does.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:42 PM CST up reply actions
again
I love this philosophy. “I was wrong before but am right now but will bring up the fact that I was bringing it up longer than all of you, wrongly. Somehow this makes me look better”
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 8:59 PM CST up reply actions
I was never wrong about Deng.
I saw who he was long ago. The Miami playoff series didn’t fool me. Hell the very fact that many Bulls fans point to that series 2 years ago is saying something in and of itself. Deng will never be more than an 18 ppg 7 rpg guy. Now in truth there is nothing wrong with those numbers. Quite respectable and will keep him in the league a LONG time. But so many of us here want to think of him as a star type player when the truth is he is not. That’s what has always frustrated me about the situation.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 10:04 PM CST up reply actions
Can you show the post again.
I’m curious to see all the guys outperforming Deng in past seasons. What you also fail to see is that Deng is still so young as has been brought up here. I’m assuming most of the people you’ll compare him to are 27-30 year old veterans who have peaked as players. Deng still has a lot of room for growth and first contracts are used to account for that growth. Deng is just as good as Iguodala, Granger, etc. Compare him to those contracts and he’s doing just fine.
Here are guys under 25 I would take over Deng
Can’t find the old list, but here is a brand new one.
Guys I’d DEFINITELY take over Deng:
1 Lebron James
2 Carmelo Anthony
3 Kevin Durant
4 Danny Granger
5 Jeff Green (plays the 4 now but can play the 3)
6 Josh Smith (also plays the 4 but can play some 3)
Note: with Green and Smith we could go small and put those guys at the 4 and not lose much because they both rebound and defend like they are bigger than they are
7 Andre Iguodala
Guys I would probably take over Deng:
8 Thaddeus Young (I think his ceiling is higher than Deng’s)
9 Rudy Gay (Say what you want…gimme this guy on the Bulls with Rose over Deng any day!!)
All these guys are 25 or under. I can’t think of anything that Deng does glaringly better than any of these guys. Difference is that all these guys can give you what Deng gives you AND they are explosive athletes. Solid game + explosive athleticism = better than Deng
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 7:46 PM CST up reply actions
and that's not counting the shooting guards that can swing between the 2 and 3....
…like Kevin Martin and Brandon Roy for instance. The more I think about it those may be the only two under 25, but in any event there are two more for you that I’d take over Deng. Martin was drafted when Deng was and Roy was drafted about 2 years after Deng and they have both progressed considerably. The jump should have already happened with Deng. Who knows, maybe it will…but i seriously doubt it.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 8:18 PM CST up reply actions
OK
LeBron – max player
Carmelo – max player
Durant – that’s a lot of assuming, but agreed there
Granger – this is convenient timing. Granger has had a great start, Deng a horrible start. I’d say they are in the same class heading into this season
Jeff Green – here is where your train became derailed. Have you seen Jeff Green. Up until the last 2 weeks, he has basically been a below average SF.
Josh Smith – headcase. but definitely in the same class as Deng
Iguodala – same class as Deng
Thaddeus Young – way too unproven to make this list as far as I’m concerned. I’ll take Deng
Rudy Gay – puts up similar numbers to Deng on a worse team. He doesn’t have me excited. But I’ll put him in the same class as Deng.
So you have 2 players significantly better, 1 better, and the rest in the same class or worse. The problem is your pulling Deng’s worst season so far. Let the season play out before dumping on Deng. If you compare previous seasons, Deng outshines most of the players in his same grouping.
Lebron and Carmelo??
who would take those guys over Deng?! You can’t be serious…
by NormVanBeer on Dec 15, 2008 10:59 PM CST up reply actions
Blasphemy!
I’d never take those two over Deng!
Takeover players
are not what win in the NBA, at least based on what you describe them as. By your logic, Stephon Marbury is a takeover player. Larry Hughes is too. What you want is a volume shooter. And you can’t have too many of those. Take Gordon for instance, he is taking 15-20 shots per game not matter what happens. It’s not a bad thing, it’s just his game. If you have too many of those players on one team, suddenly you stagnate their offense.
yes! this is the problem when Larry, Ben and Drew are all on the court at the same time
they all end up looking for their shot whenever they can (although, and I can’t believe I’m writing this, Larry hasn’t been looking to shoot at every turn nearly as much) combine that when they are all on the court with Rose (who should have the ball in his hands and be creating more times than not… and it creates real problems).
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 3:32 PM CST up reply actions
Gordon actually takes...
Anyway, interestingly, the more he shoots, the better he is. Kind of.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
or he shoots more when he's shooting well
aka he rides his hot streaks and takes good shots. Gordon is really good, I wish more people would appreciate him (I’m looking at you, Paxdorf).
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not using this to knock Ben.
He’s an effective player because he takes more shots. Like I said, that’s his game. I just was saying you can only have so many of that player on your team or they fight over the ball.
Oh yeah, I didn't mean to accuse you of knocking Ben
I was just saying in general, there’s a rather large contingent here and in the larger Bulls fan community that don’t appreciate how good Gordon really is (they tend to be the “he’s too short” guys) and it’s pretty annoying.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 3:43 PM CST up reply actions
Sometimes you have to be a better player
to have the ability to take more shots.
by messwiththebull on Dec 15, 2008 1:07 PM CST up reply actions
Well I wouldn't consider Hughes a Takeover Player
I figured that was implied in the post, which is why I said to get rid of him but it’s fair that you mentioned it. You have to be somewhat successful in taking over games to be valuable to your team. Jannero Pargo takes shots in bunches, but I don’t think anybody here would confuse him with Billups or Hamilton or Paul Pierce.
Is there a definite cutoff separating Takeover Players from hacks that just shoot a lot? That’s out of my scope, but it’s above the career .448 TS% of Hughes and .478 of Pargo. Marbury had some good years, I think he could’ve won a title as a third option with the right personel.
Is your comment a joke?
Name me ONE single NBA Champion in the last 30 years who hasn’t had at least 2 superstars or 3 takeover players. I don’t believe you’ll be able to do it. Great players win championships C.J. You don’t win with a guy like Deng being so prominent.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:44 PM CST up reply actions
Why does Deng have to be a superstar? He's not being paid the max.
What do you decide to be a takeover player?
Detroit is the obvious case. San Antonio has had two great players and one superstar. I remember San Antonio questioning Tony Parker and wanting to bring in JKidd. But now as Parker has aged and grown as a player (now 26), he seems to be a great player.
Sometimes you just need to be patient. If you traded everyone without giving them a chance you’ll never know how good they can be. You’re probably the same guy that complains about Pax trading Chandler. But at the time was yelling for him to be moved.
On a better-built team, Deng doesn't have to be a superstar for $12 million
Tayshaun makes $10 million a year and has been worth every penny to the Pistons, but only because they already had two takeover players in place with enough room under the luxury tax to trade for a third.
But the Bulls have $26 million tied up through 2012 in Hinrich, Deng, and Nocioni. Their payroll stands at $70 million this year, and that’s without a Gordon extension. The Bulls just don’t have the payroll flexibility to give $12 million a year to somebody who never takes a big shot.
You make a good point that maybe we’re being quick to judge a 23 year old, but I don’t see anything in Deng’s game that can be improved dramatically. Tony Parker could always get to the rim, he just had problems finishing. For the same reason, Derrick Rose should improve dramatically in the next few years. But Deng is more limited.
To anybody who wants to keep Deng, post your plans turning this team around. If it’s to re-sign Gordon and hope Deng and Tyrus and Noah improve, well… waiting is what Paxson has been doing ever since 2004, and it hasn’t worked. I look at Kobe, Gasol, Bynum and then I look at Rose, Gordon, Deng, and I realize we aren’t even close.
I think the most agreed upon plan
involves dealing Hinrich and Noc for expiring contracts. They can still afford Gordon and be a player in 2010 if they choose that route.
Deng still has to regain his form before he can improve, but his cutting ability can serve this offense very well. He still has the ability to add to his mid-range and eventually 3pt shooting ability. I also wonder if later in his career he can slide to the 4 and play more of an athletic 4.
I think your Lakers example is perfect for why patience is the best route at times. Kobe was begging to be traded. Kobe himself was upset that the team wouldn’t deal Bynum for Kidd. Then guess what, Bynum started pulling his game together. Then the Lakers were handed a gift in Gasol. The point of this is not every move needs to be drastic, franchise saving moves. You just keep your options open and move from there.
Just a few years ago, the Cavs looked dead in the water other than Lebron. Today they are one of the top teams. Boston was praying for Oden, now they are the defending champs. If the team could pull off a big deal using Deng I’d be all for it. But for right now he’s a valuable player who can help this team.
Well, Cleveland and Boston made some drastic, franchise saving moves
Remember that two years ago Eric Snow, Larry Hughes, and Drew Gooden were starting alongside LeBron and Z.
You’re right though, the Lakers are good example of sticking with your guys. But I don’t think Derrick Rose is Kobe Bryant, and I don’t think Pau Gasol for Javaris Crittenton trades come along every year, so that’s not an example that’s easy to duplicate.
I appreciate you outlining a plan though. Basically we differ on one thing, and that’s whether Luol can be a 3rd option for a championship team. I think if we had Kobe, then Deng would be a fine #3. But not with Rose and Gordon and no guarantee of a big man scorer coming along anytime soon.
That's where were on the same page though
and why I disagreed with your post. Deng, Gordon, Rose will never win a championship. There needs to be another great player brought in here. So we can do that in one of 4 ways:
1)Trade Gordon in a package
2)Trade Deng in a package
3)Don’t re-sign Gordon and use that money for 2010
4)Trade everyone not named Rose, Deng, Gordon to get under cap for 2010.
I have no problem with Deng as a #3 option if 1 and 2 are Rose and Stoudemire/Bosh for example.
My bad Yao.
I posted something similar regarding the comparison between Prince and Deng later in this post. It probably should have been here. But the point you made is very similar to the one I tried to make about the money Deng makes. I’ve had no problem with him gettin’ paid. Hell, more power to him (and Kirk and Nocioni) for gettin’ paid. But with the way our team is constructed, we gotta have a little more from all 3 of our big money players. We AT LEAST need them to be as effective as they were a couple seasons back.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 10:04 PM CST up reply actions
Rudy Gay
has a similar career PER to Luol Deng, only he did his numbers on a worse Grizzlies team. Why again should the Bulls get him? He’s already been pushed to a #2 scorer on his own team by OJ Mayo.
As for BJ Mullens, the guy is averaging 6.5 pts and 4 reb for a Big 10 team on a cupcake schedule. And you think he is the future for the Bulls? It says a lot when you’re doing your scouting based on High School Youtube videos.
O.J. Mayo will be...
…in the top 10 in scoring in the NBA for 10 of the next 12 years. So there is no shame in being pushed to number 2 when it comes to a guy like that.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:46 PM CST up reply actions
Thanks Nostradamus.
Leading scorer for the Grizz doesn’t impress me.
It better, because O.J. Mayo...
…is better than Deng too and would have pushed Deng out of the #1 option. Oh wait, Deng would probably never have been the number 1 option to begin with. My fault.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 7:51 PM CST up reply actions
So far Mayo has proven he can score
he has shown no other ability. That makes him pretty one dimensional so far. Let’s see if the rest of his game develops.
Can't possibly develop any less...
…than Deng’s game has.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 16, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
Do you really believe all this?
Or are you just blinded by some hatred for Deng. You can’t really think he’s such a horrible player.
% of scoring assisted 2007-2008
Carlos Boozer 71%
Andrei Kirilenko 74%
David West 57%
Peja Stojakovich 81%
Shawn Marion 81%
Amare Stoudemire 70%
Richard Jefferson 77%
To compile this list, I took players who were all forwards, all have made an all-star team, and all play with an all-star pg. Maybe assisted scores aren’t such a bad thing?
by CJ Bulls on Dec 14, 2008 3:39 PM CST reply actions 5 recs
ugh. rings don't matter in evaluatng individual player performance.
KG didn’t have a ring and now he does. Does that make him any better of a player? No, it just means his teammates are better. Get Deng better teammates and we’ll be closer to winning a championship. Shipping out Deng takes us further away from that goal because he’s one of our best players and one of the better players in the league, despite your protests that he isn’t.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:19 PM CST up reply actions
Rings do matter when figuring out what it takes to win
It seems like the stats you follow (namely Adjusted Plus Minus) focus on getting an advantage in points over a long period of time, and that’s a good way to build a contender. But history has shown you need more than that to win a title.
At some point, it’s a tie ballgame in a crucial playoff game, and all the +/- and PER stats are thrown out the window. At that point, you need players to step up and win you games, and that’s just not easy to when one of your top scorers scores mostly off assists. You can argue all day about how great KG is because his adjusted +/- is high, but he wasn’t the most valuable player on his team. Paul Pierce was, because he was better at creating on his own and hit big shot after big shot down the stretch.
I used to be a big stats guy too, but at some point you realize that high +/- numbers don’t win championships. And until I see a Karl Malone / Amare Stoudemire type player lead his team to a title, continually scoring off assists late in games, the Takeover Player idea holds.
to win a title you need 2 or 3 great players. the Bulls have one of those (I think)
in Derrick Rose. Deng isn’t going to be an all-time great by any means, but what All-NBA level players are out there at SF that we can get to replace him? He’s one of the better SF’s in the league because he plays both ways and he fits with Rose and Gordon (at least in theory) because he doesn’t need the ball in his hands to be effective.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 4:38 PM CST up reply actions
I mentioned Rudy Gay
whose career 15.5 PER and .527 TS% almost mirror Deng exactly, but the way he scores is so much different that it makes him a more valuable piece in a playoff series.
But we can trade Deng for a takeover PF or C as well, and fill Deng in with a defensive specialist. The Pistons, Spurs, and Celtics teams who won didn’t need a 4th player who could make an open jumpshot, they won with Tayshaun Prince and Bruce Bowen and James Posey, defensive SFs who kept their matchups close while letting the stars be stars.
all three of those guys you mentioned CAN hit open jump shots
in fact, that’s basically their only value on the offensive end. They play great D and camp out for open jump shots (Prince creates his own offense more than the other two, but the point is valid for Bowen and Posey).
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
Fair enough
But I’d rather not pay any of them $12 million a year.
good, because they don't play for Chicago
and also, I wouldn’t expect you to shell out $12 million a year personally :-P
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:05 PM CST up reply actions
another thing about Rudy Gay
his defense is quite simply not good. he’s an pretty good offensive player, but he’s a net negative under APM, which indicates how bad his D really is. and going to what Sports2 said above, Rudy Gay’s backup is certainly worse than Nocioni has been the last few years and Deng still looks better under APM. The game is played on both sides of the ball, but Rudy only plays one side.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 5:17 PM CST up reply actions
Huh?
Deng doesn’t fit with Rose. Deng even admitted that he hasn’t learned how to play with *****The D. RO. SHO*****
by Johnny"B"ull on Dec 14, 2008 8:38 PM CST up reply actions
Good thing Deng plays with Derrick Rose.
Get another “go-to” guy, and Deng is fine. He’s a number 3 option. And being paid like it.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
the Bulls' strategy is simple,
Ben 1st qtr 2nd qtr Luol 3rd Drew and Rose and 4th BG and Rose.
What happens when Kirk comes back?
More like a #5
The Bulls will never win a Championship with Deng being the #3 guy.
by Johnny"B"ull on Dec 14, 2008 8:40 PM CST up reply actions
Never say never
Bulls need an inside presence. Drew’s still a jump shooting big. That’s our obstacle not Luol, Ben or Derrick. Paxson really needs to pull a trade or get a plan, we haven’t had an offensive inside the paint big since Eddy and Eddy was too turnover prone and too awful at D to count on when the game matterred in the 4th (Where he mostly sat).
Hell, even if we had Mr. Putback (Tyson) today we’d be miles better than we are because his D can help our transiition D atrocity and help control the paint so we’re not always -42 per game in scoring in the paint. It’s a testament to the strength of Derrick, Ben, Luol, and Larry of late that we’re even close to winning games giving up 50-60 pts int eh paint and scoring 20-30…..
Tyrus can be a wildcard to help a-la Tyson with his block shots, but he’ll never be a real offensive threat and is too damn inconsistent….
At their best, every guy on this list...
…is immeasurably better than Deng though. I don’t think it’s close.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:46 PM CST up reply actions
oh, sure it's close
and I’d take Deng over Jefferson, Kirilenko, Peja, and Marion.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:01 PM CST up reply actions
I wouldn't
Take Deng over AK47 (a top 10 defender in the game) has more offensive skills than Luol (passing, shooting, scoring)….
Andrei’s underrated and really is a guy who could use a change of scenery (the contracts a tough bet) I’d like him on my Bulls though to rid ourselves of some iffy contracts…..
AK47 has a max contract
Deng considerably below. And I would not make that exchange if offered.
Agreed.
I was going to disagree with yfBB and say that I’d take Kirilenko over Deng, but that was merely based on talent. I think Kirilenko is better than Deng right now.
However, since AK47 will be 30 when Rose is turning 23, and Deng will only be 26, and the contracts… I agree.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
But AK47's contract
Expires 3 years sooner…..giving us room to max out Rose and possibly resign a still young AK47….
What’s best though is that Utah might be desperate to rid themselves of AK47 to keep either Boozer or Millsap or both, so the Bulls can be in the driver seat to a degree to trade for AK47, improve their #3 considerably and rid themselves of a bad contract…
Plus I don’t know if I’d get rid of Deng in this scenario, I’d like to keep Deng and use Noc, Thabo, Gooden as the bait for AK47….
We improve with a better player in Andrei who can control the paint, play a bit of every position, pass in the post, score, and mostly DEFEND…..
If they don't max out Rose for ANY reason, FUCK them.
Seriously, as long as he “deserves” it, he gets the max no matter the situation.
And 31 is not “still young.”
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Wait...
read the rest of your comment….. um, so you’re not up for a Deng-Kirilenko swap? Huh?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
No
Kirilenko has been more effective in the past as a very athletic 4. If we have to throw Deng in that’s not bad, but not my preference….
I’d rather be in the drivers seat and use it to rid ourselves of a bad contract (Noc-bad long term thanks mostly to Deng—though Noc’s play of late seems to be making it bad either way, i don’t think that’ll continue because he’s been more than effective in the past) an expiring deal that allows them (the Jazz) to work out the Boozer deal……and maybe Millsap too).
Bulls in this scenario lose Gordon, but there’s a good chance we lose him either way (As having $$ tied into Gordon-Deng and waitng for Rose and who knows about Tyrus will be tough to get us further).
I think a lineup of Rose-SG (likely Hughes for 1 more year)-Deng-AK47 and hopefully Noah if he improves could be stellar.
We then could switch a bit with Tyrus at a 3/4 spot and Deng at times as a slow 2, but AK47’s d wouldn’t be too awful.
If we had to give up Deng for AK47, that wouldn’t be awful, but I think in light of Deng’s poor start and his fairly reasonable when he’s back to form (Seems to be more his play of the past 3-4 games) That his contract won’t be a killer and he will be more tradable when that contract is off the BYC….
But I haven’t necessarily run the numbers out. I like versatile lineups and AK47, Deng-Tyrus, Rose (who can play some 2, but is better a 1, much better) and even Noah are versatile, athletic players, Noah-Tyrus-Deng are all decent defenders (none are consistent perhaps, but all have a defensive mindset) and AK47 is a great defender…
Might be interested….would we be a title threat? Likely not, though who knows what Rose will be?
If Rose becomes a superstar in the vein of a CP3 soon, and we have the consistent Deng and a defender who can stop the best 2-4’s in the league in AK47, who knows…..
Not to mention
if you look at the “Clutch” time stats…you see that BG was assisted 61% while piling up those points.
Aren't 4s usually in this category?
And which of the players on the list play with an All-League PG? A position the Bulls haven’t had until this year, the year coincidentally that Deng has struggled the most.
by messwiththebull on Dec 15, 2008 1:09 PM CST up reply actions
And then there's the intangibles...
Bottom Line:
I can’t believe how most of you on BaB rely on statistics to quantify a player as “good” or “bad”. Do you have eyes? Even from a “couch” perspective, a knowledgeable person of the game can see if a player has talent and understands the game (i.e. positioning, help-defense, etc.).
Deng has talent and understands the game! While I agree he has had a poor start to this season, I think he is an above-average SF overall. Just watch the game with everything he does. And BTW, he’s not a head-case like TT and Noah!
And to push my point that you rely on stats too much:
“sign BG to an extension”
“YOU’VE GOT TO BE KIDDING ME?”
BG hurts this team in so many ways (intangibles?). Yes, let me count them:
1. Stops the offensive “flow” (another way of saying "selfish")
2. Does not protect the ball very well (another way of saying "turnover")
3. Plays lethargic defense (JUST WATCH THE GAME!)
4. Has a non-chelant (sp?) attitude (don’t confuse this with work-ethic)
5. Does not finish well when driving to the rim (coupled with poor decison making)
6. And oh ya, he’s short for a SG (Matt’s favorite)
And all of these add up to the biggest weakness of them all:
He takes the ball away from Rose!
Based on your analysis of BG
and your ridiculous undervaluing of his worth to the team, I’d say you’re probably the one who “doesn’t have eyes.” Do you realize how bad we would be this year if he weren’t on the team?
When I watch NBA games I often call the fouls before the referees do. Sometimes it’s a gift. Most of the time it's troublesome. - NBA Observer
Who cares about this year!
I care about the future of this team. Gordon will never accept that he isn’t at Derrick’s level. Gordon needs to be replaced with a tall talented guard. I think Richardson would have been perfect.
by Johnny"B"ull on Dec 14, 2008 8:44 PM CST up reply actions
Gordon's
Built like a tank and is continually beating his competition at the SG spot…..why all the BG hate. The small frontcourt guys complained about that made sense on paper is not turning into anything in reality, our guards are solid, a top 5 guard rotation in the league, but we’re so godawful down low tha twe’re a middle of the pack team.
Derrick will only get better. Gordon will only learn to play better with Derrick as the year and year’s go on…..
Size is everything in the NBA, and Gordon’s not a physically small player, he’s just a short player. Guys can shoot over him, but BG’s using his strength to stop them from constantly driving through him.
The "eyes" have it...
“Do you realize how bad we would be this year if he weren’t on the team.”
Do you realize if we had a SG that could play solid defense, could hit over 40% of his 3-pointers (doesn’t need to be a slasher cause Rose does that) and most importantly understood his role on the team (in other words – it’s Rose’s show!) how much better we would be?
BG is hurting this team more than he is helping it !!
And BTW, not only do I have eyes, I do think BG has some value. I wouldn’t trade him away for just salary relief.
Could you please name the players that fit your description?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I was afraid...
someone would ask that. Sheesh.
Yeah, forgive me for asking you to support your argument!
Or do you have an argument?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Hahah, this is the weirdest debate I've ever read.
This guy gets annoyed when you ask him to corroborate his claims.
HOW DARE YOU TAKE HIM UP ON HIS WORD!
To my 2 friendly kitty cats:
Tyger & Cub:
I don’t argue, just debate.
And they are just opinions at that.
I do not have the time to go looking for a SG that is currently in the league that might meet my criteria. If you do, feel free… However, I believe I gave reasonable parameters!
p.s.
Tyger: I forgive you. Just don’t ever do it again! :)
"Arguments" are part of a debate.
It’s a sentence, most matter of factly. Or a “point” less so.
You do have time to be ridiculous, though. So that’s cool.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Wait, so you just admitted that you made a claim
that you haven’t even bothered looked up, because you don’t have the “time”? Damn Stephen Alcoholics Anonymous, you must be one busy son of a gun. You make my head spin by holding criteria that’s not just subjective, but of a player that you can’t even label that could meet said labels.
By the way, there’s nowhere in my name that warrants me being a “kitty cat.” A “Nittany” dictates a type of location, which usually means Mt. Nittany in Penn State (you could make the argument that a cub is synonymous with a young lion— even though my picture is my dog with a freakin’ Cubs hat— but I doubt you were thinking that much, considering you’re in a tight schedule and all).
Yes...
You guys are just way too funny and smart for me to debate with anymore.
Cubby: A Mt. Nittany near Penn State? Gee, I did not know that…
“Stephen Alcoholics Anonymous”: Boy, I bet that took some time…
But at least I’m “cool” in Tyger’s eyes… :)
Peace!!
I would have though "NittanyCub"
was a young Nittany Lion?
by Granny Waiters on Dec 16, 2008 6:07 PM CST up reply actions
The Bulls only need Rose slashing and have 4 other guys stand still?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 12:46 PM CST up reply actions
I'm not a BG advocate
but you have to tip your cap to his performance this year. I watch his FG% and I’m happy with what I’ve seen from his thus far for the most part.
by messwiththebull on Dec 15, 2008 1:11 PM CST up reply actions
It's comical that you think a team only needs one guy who can dribble penetrate
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 15, 2008 1:16 PM CST up reply actions
then we're ok as is!
considering ben’s skills in this area leave something to be desired.
he’s not awful, but i admit i cringe most of the time.
See my reply..
to Matt above.
I think both of you are smarter than that. I think…
Unfortunately, I doubt a few of us think the same of you.
:-)
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Take your own advice and watch the Bulls play Steven A
Given your profile name, I will assume you are just saying whatever comes to your head for attention.
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 14, 2008 10:23 PM CST up reply actions
OK Ozzie...
Love your “in depth” reply to my opinion.
My profile name happens to be my real first name plus initials. And next time, spell it right.
Stephen A Smith
is the best.
That’s why he said that.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
THANK YOU AND AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!
I’ve been screaming this from the mountain tops for the past 2 years and I thought nobody listened. And for those who insist that Deng isn’t being paid much money, his contract is potentially as valuable as that of Elton Brand who is clearly better than Deng even now while he’s struggling.
Thank you YaoPau for this excellent analysis. I didn’t hate Deng until people started treating him like the next Scottie Pippen or something. Deng is so average it’s ridiculous. I bristled when we signed him for big money and ignored BG and stood by and listened while everyone screamed about how BG doesn’t deserve more than $9 mil/yr. I hope we don’t end up getting bitten too badly in the end for signing Deng and not Gordon.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:26 PM CST reply actions
I agree with your Deng analysis
I think Deng and Gordon shouldn’t be here. Do you seriously want to pay a small guard 11/12 million who plays ZERO defense?!
Deng lacks the histrionics of Nocioni
so Deng is obviously a poor defender. ;)
by Granny Waiters on Dec 14, 2008 9:15 PM CST up reply actions
Because so many guards in the NBA are great at defense right?
That Ray Allen sure was a lockdown guy his ENTIRE career no? Michael Redd…..hooo boy can’t get anything past him. And don’t get me started on the defensive strengths of Corey Maggette, Jamal Crawford, Jason Richardson, Jason Terry, etc etc etc.
Yup, you’re right. Ben Gordon is the only poor defender at his position. There are so many better options at SG just sitting around waiting to be signed that we don’t need BG at all!!!!!! In fact, let’s just send him home.
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 14, 2008 10:26 PM CST up reply actions
It's apparent that so many of you here simply don't know the game.
Deng is a valuable player, but he is so overvalued by many of you that it’s ridiculous. Gordon on the other hand is a part of a burgeoning dynamic duo. Rose and Gordon are quickly approaching top 5 backcourt in the NBA status (Right now the Lakers, Hornets, Pistons, Heat, Nets, Jazz and Spurs are all ahead of them right now). The reason the Bulls are not very good has NOTHING to do with Gordon’s defense or the backcourt in general. It’s because we don’t get what we need out of the frontcourt. I can live with this backcourt, but we MUST improve our frontline…and if that means moving Deng then so be it.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 8:54 PM CST reply actions
I think you need to repeat yourself more
until we all really get it.
I love Bulls fans. Trash the best players on the team, like the guys that stink because they’re cheaper and don’t have ‘egos’. Jerry Reinsdorf approves.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:02 PM CST up reply actions
Yup, that's all of us.
Deng-hating, Lindsey Hunter-worshiping coupon clippers.
Asked what kind of player he expects to be in the next five years, he said: "Not a star, but like, a superstar. Something around, like, Chris Paul, Kobe Bryant, LeBron James, Kevin Garnett, Paul Pierce, something like that."
I'm extrapolating from the fringe here
but the majority who pop up on the ‘mainstream’ forums. Do you ever read those things? Everyone’s soft and overpaid. I like that Nocioni character, etc.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:06 PM CST up reply actions
I realize that the majority here aren't so fickle
to call everyone soft and worry about ‘takeoverability’ enough to create a made up definition (and a made up example like Rip Hamilton) for it.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:07 PM CST up reply actions
Ow, care to explain yourself?
If I remember correctly, you were leading the “we are the 2004 Pistons, we don’t need a star” charge last year, and that hasn’t worked out at all. I know you’re anti-2010, so I’m interested to hear your plan for getting back to contender status while keeping Deng around.
Uh, I'm pretty sure that isn't what he's been saying.
But what do I know, I’ve only been here since 2006
agreed, I believe Matt's contention has been for quite some time is
keep the good players and add more good / better players. Dumping Deng for lesser players doesn’t help us and I don’t understand why people don’t get that. Making up terms (takeoverability) to justify an argument based on a cliche is pretty weaksauce.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 15, 2008 12:10 AM CST up reply actions
that's pretty much it.
and you can go for 2010 with Rose/Gordon/Deng.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 12:19 AM CST up reply actions
agreed, this is why failing to sign Gordon long term was such a huge failing
bah. still really annoying. I hope they can resign him this summer and he doesn’t leave for nothing.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 15, 2008 12:23 AM CST up reply actions
We have an overabundance of love
for gritty white guys.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 14, 2008 9:16 PM CST up reply actions
Meh
I think we needed to sign him, but I’d be pretty willing to trade him too.
His injuries are a great source of mystery. He hasn’t missed much time this year, but at a couple points this year a “sore back” has been mentioned. And apparently something seen in an mri on his back last year caused the NBA’s insurance carrier to not fully cover his contract.
This year he’s been pretty routinely abused by more athletic players. Hakim Warrick and Rudy Gay both had their way with him last night. It’s getting to the point of being quite frustrating. He was never more than an adequate athlete, but now he’s playing like less than that defensively. Offensively he’s not moving without the ball that much, which used to be the great strength of his game.
All in all, I don’t like what I see, and it might be the first time I’d be in favor of the Bulls continuing their tradition of signing their young guys to big deals and then trading them pretty quickly afterwards. If he picks it back up to his 06-07 level, I’ll be plenty happy.
De gustibus non est disputandum
I agree that the injuries are a concern
I don’t think he’s been doing bad defensively at all this season. And the lack of movement away from the ball is a problem with the whole team, which has me thinking it’s Vinny.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:23 PM CST up reply actions
one thing that is standing out
is his drop in rebound rate, especially on the offensive end where he used to get plenty of points off of putbacks.
Now, I don’t know how this happened since was always so SOFT, but he’s usually been a very good rebounder for his position. Maybe they all came in the first quarter, before ‘man’ time.
(I’ll stop being sarcastic now, this thread just sucked the life out of me)
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:29 PM CST up reply actions
This bothers me too
I’ll buy that Deng needs some more time with Rose to regain his offensive efficiency, but that shouldn’t affect his rebounding game. There’s no reason he shouldn’t be close to 7 or 8 rebounds a game.
by drew gooden's facial growth on Dec 14, 2008 9:45 PM CST up reply actions
yeah I also noticed this a few games back and it has been driving me nuts
every game since. maybe Deng is playing further away from the bucket in the new offense? or it’s a function of him not cutting as much so he’s not around the hoop on those missed shots? I’m not really sure what’s going on but I hope he fixes it soon.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 14, 2008 9:54 PM CST up reply actions
The coaches...
Have made a point of keeping the lane clear for D Rose… it’s one of the reasons why Deng has struggled so much and one of the reasons why Tyrus seems lost often. And I think it’s hurting both of those players because they aren’t around the basket for the offensive rebounds.
I assume and hope it will get much better. With Del and Bernie, there is no shortage of experience, despite having a brand new coach. As the year goes on these players need to be taught how to slash to the hoop and follow drives without hindering D Rose.
Since you don't know...
…clearly you don’t ever watch a game. ;-P You only get your basketball from stats. Clearly.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I finally skimmed the content of the fanpost (I was content with pot-shotting commenters)
and I think it stunk.
Clutch is lame, the jumpshooting ‘myth’ was already covered, and taking Deng’s numbers from only this season and last is somewhat cherry-picking.
Yes, if he’s a below-average player all season, it’s a problem. But sheesh. He’s good, he’s paid accordingly, if the argument is to just shout regarding who has ‘balls’ and who doesn’t, I’m not really interested.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:17 PM CST reply actions
and if clutch is lame
then deeming ‘superstar’ and ‘takeover-er’ is worse.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 9:19 PM CST up reply actions
Rec'd
Great job showing some fans (like me) the weaknesses of Deng. That comparison with Hughes killed me. And that’s why you got my rec’d. But I still think he’s a useful player, because every player has his mission. D Rose is to create opportunities for others, BG to score on "crunch" time and Deng to score early and play defense when we need most, even though VDN seems to believe more on Noc on the fourth quarter.
I’m not saying Cleveland will win the championship this year, but, besides Lebron and now Williams, who the fuck do they have more to score on "crunch" time? We already have our two "go to guys", the rest is here only to play defense, set screens, rebound, etc, etc… Besides, if I recall, we always want Rose to handle the ball on the last minutes of the game and to attack the rim. So, why all this talk about Deng not scoring on the fourth quarter, bla, bla, bla…?
You’re right on one thing: we gave him a huge contract. But now there’s nothing we can do about it. And you guys can stop thinking about trading Deng. The reasons are simple:
1 – Pax doesn’t know how to make a blockbuster trade
2 – He loves too much the players he drafted, despite the fact that he traded Chandler and Curry
http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)
Chandler and Curry
were drafted by Jerry Krause, not Paxson.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 14, 2008 9:34 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
my bad. Always forgot that Paxson only become GM in 2003. But the point is, he drafted Hinrich, BG, Deng, Duhon, Tyrus, Noah, Thabo, Gray – just to name the major ones, I hope I’m not forgetting anybody – and now Rose, and didn’t make trade with anyone. Even Duhon left the Bulls because is contract run out not because Paxson made a trade…
http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)
You guys are too hung up on stats and other bullsh!t!!!
Bottom line is that basketball is a game where the best players have what I call the “Dog” in them. That means that they take the bull by the horns and make it do what they want it to do. I challenged a guy earlier to name me a championship team in the last 30 years that hasn’t had 2 superstars or 3 “takeover” type players. The teams with guys who will impose their will on the game are the ones that win. We have a budding player like that (Rose) and another guy who is more capable of that than anyone else on our roster (Gordon). Deng has NEVER shown any inclination of being the type of player to take over anything. Even the serene Tim Duncan puts his foot down and takes over.
Now Deng is obviously not Tim Duncan, but many of you treat him like he’s an all-star performer or something. If you didn’t treat him or talk about him like he’s potentially great then there would be no one insisting that he is overvalued. The guy simply doesn’t have the heart of a lion or a killer instinct and as a devout Bulls fan that bothers me. Gordon does, Rose does….hell even Hinrich does. But you damn near need a wide lens camera to find Deng down the stretch. I just cannot stand soft a$$ players who masquerade as semi-stars. My heart is in it so i’m not nearly as objective as many of you are. Fuck the +/-, fuck the PER, fuck all that shit. Bottom line is right now Luol Deng is not passing the eyeball test. So damn him until he raises his level of play. He doesn’t deserve to be defended by any of you until he begins to play better on a consistent basis!!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 14, 2008 10:20 PM CST reply actions
wait
so do you like Deng or don’t you?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 10:25 PM CST up reply actions
(better condescending joke)
you forgot to mention the eye of the tiger.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2008 10:26 PM CST up reply actions
The moment I stopped reading
Bottom line is that basketball is a game where the best players have what I call the "Dog" …
I think you’re forgetting grit, intangibles, and never-say-die.
That's what "Having the Dog" encompasses
It’s a guy who brings it regardless of what the +/- or PER says. You are making my point for me. Forget the b.s. stats.
For the record though Mark Madsen had “grit”, “intangibles” and a never say die attitude, but gimme me a winner with serious game anyday and he probably has those things. Just because a guy is the team leader in getting floorburns doesn’t make me like him anymore. I respect the talent and the will to win. If he happens to get a floorburn then that’s cool. But i’m more concerned about having a guy with the talent and the will to simply beat the opposition by any means necessary. Deng doesn’t have it.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 7:58 PM CST up reply actions
He agrees with you
making fun of him.
Also, Luol Deng sucks.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Andres Nocioni plays hard too.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 17, 2008 4:05 PM CST up reply actions
*unbunches lexdiamond's panties*
Run along now.
by drew gooden's facial growth on Dec 14, 2008 10:27 PM CST reply actions
I wonder if I posted the same thing 11 times in a thread
Would it be more true?
What do you see in a 14 ppg with no jumper that makes one think he will be better than a 26ppg\ 12rpg guy? Is there some kind of magic formula that tells you 14 > 26??
by Dabullsfan on Jul 1, 2008 10:19 AM CDT actions actions 0 recs
Yes.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Yes!!!!!
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
by Prevenge on Dec 14, 2008 10:43 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Only if you made sure everyone knew
that you’d been saying this thing like way before anyone else was saying it!!!
Maybe you end up getting some allies to your cause
http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)
Putting all this faith in Deng is like being a Cubs fan.
You are destined to be disappointed. In the end, you’ll be let down because he’ll never live up to what you think he’ll be.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 7:59 PM CST up reply actions
I don't expect him to become a superstar
I see Deng as a good player, who can score some important points on the first three quarters. I would like him to score one or two on the fourth also, but I think he doesn’t need to be that go to guy as you seem to want him to be – that’s why you criticize him so much. In the fourth quarter, I want the ball on Rose hands and let him make whatever he wants, without forgetting BG… The others, like Deng, are there only to defend, set screens and make a basket here and there…
http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)
I criticize him because it pisses me off...
…that he rarely makes himself an option down the stretch. Right now we are DYING for a guy who can make the other team defend somebody on the blocks. Why in the hell hasn’t Deng tried to develop a post up game (trust me when i say I KNOW he hasn’t worked much on that aspect of his game)? He could be the guy who puts us over the top. He could do what he’s dying to do….which is play 1 on 1…but he could do it on the blocks. For instance, last nights game is a perfect example. Granted he went out with cramps, but Matt Caroll was guarding him a lot of the time. I would like to see Deng use his 6-9 frame and punish any smaller defenders instead of settling for that weak ass jump shot. You all think he’s efficient now. He’d be truly efficient if he made himself a formidable weapon in the post. Plus he’d help solve a glaring need of ours. It’d be perfect seeing as though we have a big man who is capable of playing away from the basket in Gooden. Deng could be an inside-outside threat and TRULY be one of the most dangerous players in the league. I am completely dissatisfied with his development and I can’t believe more of you aren’t. People keep saying, “He’s only 23”, but thats just making excuses for him, which people here are very quick to do while shitting all over everybody else on the team.
This is year 5 for Deng and by year 5 we usually know who a player is and what he’s all about. The only guy I can think of who hadn’t emerged by year 5 was Ben Wallace. Come to think of it, it was about year 5 when he became a rebounding monster. Even so, his game is predicated on something very different than Deng’s. Ben is effort. Deng is skill. I just question whether or not he has the drive to get better and that bothers me.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
The Bulls had a player who developed from a slasher
to a post player while in his early 30’s (apparently while on a minor league baseball sabbatical).
by Granny Waiters on Dec 18, 2008 6:53 AM CST up reply actions
Probably the 2nd best post player in the league!!
Behind “The Dream”, Big Mike turned himself into the second best post player in the league (and this is another thing that separates him from Kobe IMO). I hold Deng to a lofty standard….but not THAT lofty.
Mike is Mike and there is no other (even though he couldn’t hit a curveball to save his life…LOL)
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:23 PM CST up reply actions
Worst part of it is, he CAN be a star!!
He has EVERY tool that guys like Alex English, Bernard King, Adrian Dantley and Mark Aguirre had. Neither of these guys were great athletes, nor were they as good defensively as Deng. But they could all shoot the ball relatively well in their prime and they were all short guys (6’5" to 6’7") who had a penchant for being effective with their backs to the basket and all ended up being big time scorers on pretty good teams with a lot of talent around them. Deng needs to do more. What the hell was he doing this whole summer? Does he not realize how much easier the game will become for him if he gets a back to the basket game?
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:08 PM CST up reply actions
I forgot, we're supposed to be ignoring you, right?
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
He was wearing himself out
playing international ball
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 17, 2008 4:24 PM CST up reply actions
agreed on the stats argument
do you even watch the games? jesus
show me all the stats you want, but this turd is going to take some major polishing
Sometimes a player's greatest challenge is coming to grips with his role on the team.
-- Scottie Pippen
by Orlando Woolridge on Dec 14, 2008 10:45 PM CST reply actions
So who should be kept on this team
Gordon leaving, Deng traded. But we should keep Joakim and TT? I always prefer to lose my productive players in favor of risky young guys.
Oh and then when they don’t perform immediately, I trade them for more risky young guys.
Keep Gray and Hughes and trade everyone else
LOL
http://comunidadebulleana.blogspot.com/ - Comunidade Bulleana (O blog dos Bulls em Portugal)
Deng's contract will be worse than the Hughes'
I am puzzled by the number of Deng supporters in here. Clearly Deng is only an average to below average SF as supported by his lifetime stats. Deng’s main problem is that his build is similar to Scottie Pippen’s so maybe people expect him to perform like Scottie did. Unfortunately, comparing Deng to Pippen is like comparing Kobe to MJ; They are not even in the same league. Watching Deng try to create his own shot is painful and his outside shot is average at best. Everyone marvels at his defense yet he usually gets outplayed by the opposing SF. I am dumbfounded as to why Paxson would pay a third or fourth option $12 mil/year.
I am also not sure if Luol has any upside. Every since 06-07 he has regressed statistically every year. I don’t see how anyone can expect an unatheletic SF with no 3 point shot to magically improve. I know he’s a nice guy and all but his comtract makes Noc’s contract look good.
Just out of curiousity, which stats do you use to measure defense?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I'm pretty sure it was lexdiamond's "Dog" value.
divide by “takeoverability” will give you the “holyshitthisbloghasturnedtoshit” value.
by NittanyCub on Dec 15, 2008 2:47 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
I don't think there is a stat that measures defense but if there were one Deng would probably
rank a little below the median. Its funny how Deng supporters rip Paxson for picking TT and Noah, who were considered smart picks at the time, but defend the signing of Deng which was widely panned by the experts. Face it, Deng isn’t a good player. He is average at best.
Just out of curiousity, what makes Deng a “good” player in your eyes?
Who panned the Deng signing?
I don’t remember that. Do you have any links?
Simmons panned it
he pans any re-signing of players not in the top 15 in the league though.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 3:38 PM CST up reply actions
He ripped the Kings for re-signing Beno Udrih
And for the money given to Garcia in his extension. Yet, both of those deals weren’t cap breakers, and not only that, he didn’t really spend a lot of time explaining why. As you say, he only talks about good deals for the top 15 guys. Everything else is too much money, but that’s the way it goes in the NBA. (He just won’t admit it publicly, that it’s one of the ways he puts things to get people to say he’s wrong.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. It's simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get tangled, you tango on
Anyone who thinks his contract is what you would pay a superstar
Offer 6 years 72 million to Carlos Boozer, he’d laugh at you and slap your face.
Vinny Del Negro interviewed for the job today. I mean come on! Nobody else thinks this is nuts?
by Juiceboxjerry on Jun 6, 2008 4:21 PM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 18, 2008 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Rec'd
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 18, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
he would tell you he would take it...
as long as you let him out of his deal… then he would laugh his way all the way to Utah…
My name isn't Ron... I run a DJ and Karaoke business named Kidron Music... my name is Jesse...
...and he's not even a superstar
When I watch NBA games I often call the fouls before the referees do. Sometimes it’s a gift. Most of the time it's troublesome. - NBA Observer
I don't know
I think Deng is in the “good boys” club and I don’t recall seeing too many experts pan his signing.
I panned it a bit because I think Gordon’s the more explosive player and the guy who’s been more a need on our team in his tenure, but I don’t think anyone really said the Deng signing was awful—-it isn’t awful—-it’s a shame because we didn’t keep both of them, but Luol’s been playing much better of late, knows the game, and while not in the Lebron’s athletically, is a bit more athletic that folks give him credit for.
He seems to have a fragile ego though with the slumps and the disappearing act at times, but that’s a minor quip, I don’t think he’s really digressed over the years, he’s been consistent (the first 15-18 games of this season notwithstanding). He seems to have learned in Vinny’s offense what to do to be effective, and I do think Vinny’s offense will make Luol a more effective player long term than Skiles’s did. Luol shot better 2 years ago with Skiles, but again he was the 3rd option behind Ben and then Kirk…and wasn’t getting all the attention back then (Gordon definately was after his first 2 yrs of explosiveness.
His team outscores the other team when he's on the court.
And doesn’t when he’s off.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
we can't use that stat anymore
since BAB-Bass decide to ruin it for everyone.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 15, 2008 3:39 PM CST up reply actions
Btw, the updated stats are up at 82games
Just thought you wanted to know… ;)
The real problem with Luol Deng
Here is a quote from a Bulls fan at RealGM.
"
Re: WTF happened to Luol Deng?
Postby Roger Murdock on Tue Dec 02, 2008 7:20 pm
Two years ago I thought besides Lebron and Melo he was going to be the best SF in the league someday. Damn how things change. I dont know, he looked like a player with a lot of potential, but so did everyone on that Bulls team. I think we just had them all overrated a few years ago. I think there has to be some serious attitude problems on that team currently, because there is no fire, and there used to be lots of it. I used to think the bulls cared more than any other team in the league. :cry:"
http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=857762&start=0&st=0&sk=t&sd=a
Some of these guys even go so far as to blame Rose for Deng’s slow start. Damn Deng apologists.
But this post sums up a lot of what i’ve read here the last two or so years about Deng. I’m not drinking this kool aid and I can’t believe anybody else does either. Absolutely ridiculous. How could anyone look at this guy and see anything more than an average SF?
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 7:31 PM CST reply actions
How is more than an average SF?
Maybe because he’s been pretty good the previous three seasons before this one. Maybe because he was the best player on the team in the 06/07 Playoffs, and even showed up in the clutch occasionally. Imagine that. Maybe because he’s above-average defensively. He rebounds his position and generally forces his man to take tough shots. Take a look at his PER counterparts at 82games over the last few years. Or go to B-R and look at his head to head performance against other top SFs. James and Anthony have given him trouble. But, he’s more than held his own against the likes of Pierce, RJ, Butler, etc.
Maybe because nearly every summary statistic suggests he’s been solidly above-average: PER, Win Shares, Adjusted Plus Minus, etc. Hell, he’s probably above-average according to Dave Berri as well.
He has a history of above-average offensive efficiency, above-average rebounding, and above-average defense. Think that might be an above-average player? He’s obviously struggling right now, but he’s 23 with a 3-year track record of being good so the odds don’t favor him not returning to something like his previous form.
by Scotter on Dec 15, 2008 8:12 PM CST up reply actions 15 recs
Scotter just sits there listening to everyone touting their own hands
and then drops the ace of trump on them. BOOM! You got nuttin
by California Al on Dec 15, 2008 9:31 PM CST up reply actions
I hope you, and others, recommend his post.
Hopefully that will stop the influx of vapid posters coming here.
I still lurk, but I usually tend to pick my spots to post during the season because
1. Matt usually has a relatively similar take on things to my own, and writes it better than I would.
2. My other favorite basketball team since 1995 is a lot more fun to talk about right now. The UConn women’s team is ranked #1, has the best player in the country in Maya Moore, and playing great basketball so far.
3. For the 1st time, I haven’t been able to see the majority of the games this season. I don’t like commenting on the team only based on statistics, especially when the sample sizes are till this small.
I’ ll probably be posting more after the 1st of the year. I started working through some ideas today.
Deng's a good player in the same way
that Tayshaun Prince and Derek Fisher are good players. Every year they’ll post impressive +/- numbers, solid PERs, and acceptable TS%s. They’ll hold their own against the Caron Butlers and Deron Williamses. And they help you win championships. In no way am I trying to say Deng is worthless – players like him are valuable for good teams.
But like Tayshaun and Fisher, he’s not someone we should look to to handle the scoring load. His TS%‘s over his career have been .496, .517, .560, .528, .496, meaning he’s had one year out of 4.25 where he’s scored with any efficiency. That also happened to be the year only 5 eastern conference teams had a winning record…
We’re paying $12 million dollars for a solid defender / glue guy. He doesn’t have a three year track record of being above-average, he has a one year track record which didn’t carry on past 2007.
There's a problem
with disagreeing with facts.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Any chance
you can say this stuff earlier in the discussion and save us all some time? :-D
I'm not a stat head Scotter.
I go by what I see. But since you want to use stats, lets also point out that Deng rebounded well in 05-06’ and 06-07’. Last year he would have finished 6th among small forwards but the top 10 all averaged at least the same 6 rpg he averaged…and this year he sits at #20 in rebounding for small forwards. And if i do as you say and go back 3 yrs…hell let’s just use his 3 best years and what you’ll find is…..wait, he hasn’t had 3 good years. So this track record you’re talking about is b.s. He had a great playoff series and that’s the only above average thing he’s done in his time in the NBA. I mentioned a bunch of small forwards under the age of 25 in a post up above. Each of those guys made noticeable improvements from year to year. Deng made marginal improvements and now seems to be regressing. I keep saying 18 and 7 looks like what he can be good for. If that isn’t average then I don’t know what is. One thing is for sure though. All of us Bulls fans are hoping that he gets back to doing at least that.
People, Deng has pulled the wool over your eyes. When the Bulls play games that end up being fairly one sided either way, Deng looks like an all-star. He shines because the pressure situation doesn’t exist. But when the game is tight, you can forget about Deng most nights. Now there are exceptions to the rule and i’m sure someone can come up with a time or two that Deng played well under pressure. But by and large this guy doesn’t bring it when it matters most. And as for holding their own against Pierce, RJ, Butler, etc….
Deng vs. Pierce
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=denglu01&p2=piercpa01
Deng vs. Jefferson
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=jefferi01&p2=denglu01
Deng vs. Butler (stats are pretty even, but Butler has the edge AND shared with 2 all stars)
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/h2h_finder.cgi?request=1&p1=jefferi01&p2=denglu01
Funny thing. Pierce, RJ and Butler all have something in common that Deng doesn’t have. Despite PER’s and Dave Berri and whatever other numbers or whatever you wanna throw out, these guys can all carry their teams down the stretch. Deng has demonstrated that on one occassion only and i can’t believe you people are still talking about it. We may as well talk about the shot Jordan hit in game 6 to beat the Jazz for championship number 6 if we’re gonna talk about old stuff. Let Deng give us some new heroics to talk about.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 16, 2008 6:09 PM CST up reply actions
you're right, you're not a stat head
you don’t even know how to use them
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
That Jordan shot was awesome!
I’m glad you brought that up. Also… you don’t know what average is…
I keep saying 18 and 7 looks like what he can be good for. If that isn’t average then I don’t know what is.
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD STOP POSTING
YOUR NONSENSE IS OVERWHELMING
by NittanyCub on Dec 18, 2008 1:11 AM CST up reply actions 1 recs
In Defense of Deng, let me say....
…that I think Skiles and his staff did a TERRIBLE job of developing the players on our team. I’ve had plenty arguments with pretty smart folks here about Deng over the past 2 seasons or so (despite the fact that I disagree with them wholeheartedly on some issues, tyger1147, bull83 and jaina make great points) but people i used to argue with on here will tell you that I am a huge Duke fan and I had visions of Deng being the next Grant Hill when we drafted him. Skiles and co. didn’t do him any favors though (nor Hinrich, Gordon, Thomas, etc…). But you could say i’m in the loop a bit when it comes to local pro ball players. Deng has had every opportunity to improve aspects of his game over the summers at places like HOOPS gym. He would have found guys like D-Wade, Tracy McGrady, Ron Artest, Paul Pierce, Gerald Wallace, etc… working out at this facility for a significant portions of the past couple summers. Not only would his game have gotten better but he may have been encouraged to get stronger and lift some weights. Truth is people just like the guy because he is a decent person (until you’ve seen him out at a nightclub then you may change your mind).
I believe he should be further along than what he is though. Since he isn’t it leads me to believe that he’s close to leveling off. Like i said before, 18 pts and 7 rbds is something i’d take all day every day!!! But that’s average. Nothing special. And that’s what Deng is gonna give you. So let’s call him average and leave it at that.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 15, 2008 8:11 PM CST reply actions
Lu
Deng is a slighty above average SF…good rebounder, solid D, good finisher….only problem is your SF should have 3 pt range which Lu doesn’t and he is only an average athlete.
Realistically, he is a 4th option on a championship team, not a 2nd or 3rd. I think he’s reached his ceiling and will top off at 18 pt 8 rebounds which are good numbers. He’s not drastically overpaid but he certainly is overpaid. I think he’s a solid player though, might not be such a good fit for the Bulls anymore. Definitely is not untradeable or untouchable.
Defense
While I do agree with the overall message you are making, it only fair to point out that you ignored a huge department BG is lacking, defense. This was very apparent a few days ago when we played the Nets and the opposing SG was Vince Carter. There essentially wasn’t a chance in hell that BG could guard him, so Lu helped him out while Rose guarded Devin and BG was assigned a scrub. Every true great player can play defense. Gordon on the other hand is simply too small to play defense against any other great SG. So yes, he may have a better chance to hit that clutch shot over Lu, but then he’s gonna let up a shot also for the other team. So where does that leave us? Both are pretty subpar/average, but BG becomes the fan favorite because its very easy to overlook his huge defensive liability.
Take the Raports for instance, a pretty average team compared to us. If BG can’t guard Anthony Parker (6’6"), Lu will get assigned to him. You then got Bargnani (7’), Bosh (6’10") and O’Neal (6’11"). Who of those 3 will BG slide over too? So you let him guard Calderon, and then you have Rose on Bargnani??? Complete mismatch.
agreed
Gordon scores 35 on Parker and the Bulls win.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 16, 2008 1:46 PM CST up reply actions
Vince Carter
Can have plenty of those games. He’s a star afterall, and really had the talent to be more than just a star. Gordon’s played better than avg defense all year.
BG is a 90-50-40 guy on offense.
At least an average defender, and if he was 6-6, then he would be above-average. Most of his defensive deficincies come from his height, and he can’t control that. The Raptors are super-tall too, so that doesn’t count, since we’re super-short.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 16, 2008 5:10 PM CST up reply actions
BG
I’m aware he can’t control his height, that is why he is bad. The raptors are tall, but BG can’t guard any decent SF. So any decently sized backcourt would be a problem for the Bulls if BG is our long term answer.
Oh no,
Derrick Rose can’t guard centers. Why isn’t Kendrick Perkins our PG?
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
I'm arguing:
A. that Ben Gordon can guard the majority of SG’s, and his height, while a liability, isn’t a dealbreaker. Have you seen him this year? He’s been playing good D.
B. that Ben Gordon being bad guarding SF’s doesn’t matter. AT ALL. [Maybe you meant SG’s?]
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Proof
Look at his defensive rating, and then look at Lu. Look at overall for both too. Again, I don’t think Lu is good, I just think BG is the most overrated Bull:
Man, you all are KILLING me with this stat geek stuff!!
Look at the games!!! No Gordon will NEVER be a great defender. But he possesses the most valuable of abilities in the NBA today. The ability to put the ball in the hole virtually at will. On top of that he is as dangerous a player as there is in the league not named Lebron, Kobe or Dywane when he gets it going. Gordon is NOT the Bulls problem. As evidenced by winning 49 games 2 seasons ago and making the playoffs 3 years straight, you can win with Gordon because he makes himself a weapon. Our problem has been and continues to be our frontcourt.
If Deng would do something as simple as turn himself into a post up threat the he could change the way we play. We would INSTANTLY be more dangerous because then the opposition would have to defend a guy who can play close to the bucket with his back to the basket. After all he is 6’9".
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 16, 2008 6:16 PM CST up reply actions
The only problem is the stats don't support all of your statements.
What is nice about statistics is that they are objective. Sometimes our minds are clouded by bias. I think you should look into this.
How can you say Gordon is a winner because he won 49 games 2 years ago but Deng is not?
I didn't say that because we won 49 games Gordon is a winner!
What I said was you can win with Gordon and that he is less a problem than our inconsistent frontcourt. You want stats? Our backcourt of Gordon and Rose is 10th in overall efficiency and 3rd in efficiency vs. teams over .500. Our small forward position?? 20th in overall efficiency and ranked 27th against teams over .500. You wanna know how the shooting guard position stacks up? I’ll tell you. 5th in overall efficiency, 5th against teams over .500 and 5th against teams that made the playoffs last year.
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/09/2/eff/1-1
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 3:38 PM CST up reply actions
20.5 ppg 13.7 rpg and 3.4 bpg!!!
That’s what stats support Cedric Simmons doing per 48 minutes. So basically in this case, stats tell me nothing. But my eyes tell me that Simmons is a fringe NBA player who happens to be one hell of an athlete.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 3:50 PM CST up reply actions
And how should i use them Mr. Scotter?
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:50 PM CST up reply actions
You should understand what they measure, and be able to
use them within their context. You should know what’s bad, good, average for every statistic you use. You should be able to understand why a player has a particular statistic. Statistics should be a check on your objectivity. If what you believe from watching basketball isn’t supported by the stats then you should question whether you’re an accurate observer. If your going to still argue against the stats then you better have a strong argument that doesn’t involve references to dogs. And be able to explain why the stats aren’t reflecting what you’re seeing.
It’s like any field where research is required. You combining first hand observations and anecdotal evidence with hard numbers to try and get an accurate picture. Of course if you can still interpret the best evidence incorrectly. You honestly haven’t shown any ability to interpret statistics correctly. There’s a lot to learn in the area of statistics before you really know what you’re talking about. It takes months if not years. That’s the one area of your analysis I can make objective judgments about.
by Scotter on Dec 17, 2008 5:23 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Deng is awesome...
As evidenced by winning 49 games 2 seasons ago and making the playoffs 3 years straight, you can win with Deng because he is consistent
PS, your evidence is also awesome..
Gordon had a horrible year last year.
Look at the +- for this year:
http://www.82games.com/0809/08CHI4.HTM
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
I only have a Bachelor's degree.
You need a Ph. D. to decipher all that. I pay more attention to what I see on the court than some ultrastatistical breakdown. The only breakdown i really care to see at this point is a Chicago Bull ballhandler breaking down a defender.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 3:44 PM CST up reply actions
I figured you to be a vet
with your knowledge of ‘the dog’.
(sorry everyone, best I could think of)
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 4:18 PM CST up reply actions
I must admit....
…that was pretty good right there…LOL
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:48 PM CST up reply actions
Good one Granny. You got me.
Not quite as good as the “vet” comment from BullsBlogger, but a good one nonetheless :)
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 2:49 PM CST up reply actions
stat
I’m killing you with statistical information? Your arguments revolving around nothing other than you being a fan is killing me.
“On top of that he is as dangerous a player as there is in the league not named Lebron, Kobe or Dywane when he gets it going”
That is just about as ridiculous of a comment you can make. You think anyone fears Gordon more than they would fear Nash, CP3, Pierce, Manu, AI, Dirk, Amare, Ray Allen, Baron Davis, Michael Redd, Duncan, Bosh, Boozer, Joe Johnson, Carter, Melo, T Mac, etc?
My argument revolves around stats and data. Yours revolves around you going, “Ben Gordon has such a pretty jumpshot!!! He is the best!!! Pay him!!!”
by blademan88 on Dec 16, 2008 6:24 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
My argument revolves around me watching the game...
…. and knowing the game and understanding that Deng is an ok player and nothing more. You can go to every stat site ever made and you won’t convince me or anyone else who isn’t a stat geek that Deng is anything more than an average small forward.
If you look above you’ll see that I found some stats that say Ben Gordon is the 5th most efficient shooting guard in the league. Do I believe that? Not with Kobe, D-Wade, Brandon Roy, Joe Johnson and Manu Ginobili all being in the league. That right there puts him out of the top 5. But you won’t see me running around talking about how BG is top 5 because of some statistical measure. I like Gordon, but give me any of those 5 before you give me Gordon.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 3:42 PM CST up reply actions
saying your opinion and refusing to listen to contrary evidence is the type of closed minded
commentary that people don’t like in case you haven’t noticed. There’s really no point in posting comments without encouraging a discussion. People don’t want to read about what you think you see, unless it corresponds to ideas they understand or has some evidence (statistics) to support it. That’s why “stats are stupid” and you “have to have the dog” or whatever really isn’t getting through to anyone.
Here are your stats right here CJ.
http://www.hoopsstats.com/basketball/fantasy/nba/teamstats/09/11/eff/1-1
Again though, just because this site lists our shooting guard position (which for all intent and purposes means Ben Gordon) as being 5th most efficient overall, 5th most efficient against teams above .500 and 5th most efficient against playoff teams last year, in no way do I believe that Gordon is the 5th best shooting guard in the league.
- in efficiency has nothing to do with what I think. And again, if you don’t want to read what I type, then the great thing about this blog is that….you can skip right over it CJ.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 11:21 PM CST up reply actions
That's called cherry-picking,
and doesn’t really work.
“This one guy is totally right on one thing, and you should believe this argument because they say it. But they’re TOTALLY WRONG on these five others. Yeah. Trust me? Please?”
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
The premise that the "efficiency" rating
is a complete measure of overall value as a player is false.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 18, 2008 7:03 AM CST up reply actions
Of all the stats to possibly pick, you use eff?
You do realize it’s a pretty random stat. 1 assist = 1 steal = 1 point = 1 rebound in EFF.
I was trying to help you become a better poster, maybe that way you wouldn’t have so many people shoo-ing you off and calling you stupid. But for some reason, I think you prefer that.
And for your information, when Gordon really gets it going.....
….you damn right coaches fear him as much as any guy you named. Now of course guys like CP3, Pierce, Duncan and Manu come up big on such a regular basis that it’s almost no big deal. Add Tony Parker to that list as well. As for the other guys on here, they are all great players. It’s not a stretch to say they are all better players than Gordon but my point was, “He is as dangerous a player as there is in the league not named Lebron, Kobe or Dywane WHEN HE GETS IT GOING”. Gordon gets as hot as anybody at times and when he does he’s a major weapon because he’s got the mindset to beat you. He’s not gonna go 7 for 8 and not shoot anymore so that he can finish the game with a .875 fg% and have guys on blog-a-bull rave about how well he shot the ball. He’s gonna shoot till he cools off and that may mean starting off 7 for 8 and finishing 15 for 25 or something like that. Bottom line is that you can best believe the league understands the type of offensive weapon Ben Gordon is.
Real ball players ain’t thinking about their +/-. Real ballplayers are only concerned about beating you in any way they can…and if they only shoot 42% or whatever and have a PER of 14.85 or whatever in the process of beating you then oh well.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:21 PM CST up reply actions
um, we're not real ballplayers
which is why we do think about those things.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 4:28 PM CST up reply actions
Well if you ain't never been about it then don't speak on it!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:47 PM CST up reply actions
fine
then you stay out of discussions that revolve around stats, and to be safe, general forays into complex thought.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 4:49 PM CST up reply actions
Man, whatever!!
I don’t appreciate your insinuation that i’m less intelligent than you or any other blogger here. Mighty easy to say things like that while sitting in front of a keyboard and monitor. But I should expect that from you when I’m bustin’ your head with common sense and you keep trying to throw numbers in my face supporting half hearted efforts by an average NBA player.
Keep it comin’ fellas. I love it :)
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 4:57 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
from one keyboard jockey to another
you come across as unintelligent. And mostly unintelligible.
But lucky for you, I view you as more like a mascot than anything threatening.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:05 PM CST up reply actions
Look,
I’m a hood dude and I keep it real and tell it like it is. Born and raised in the CHI on the West Side (Jackson and Kilbourn or K-Town if you know the area) and I’m sorry I don’t type/speak as eloquently as you do BullsBlogger. I went to high school on the North Side of the city where I was an above average (top 10 in the area in 1993 when i graduated) but not great performer. Then went on to be an average to below average college player where i received a full ride at a high profile local university, but I got around. People in my age range in basketball circles knew me and I knew them. My point being that I know REAL ball players and we talk the game. I count a minimum of 9 current NBA players as good friends of mine (knew more but seeing as though I’m 33 years old, the vast majority of the guys i know are no longer in the league) and I also have several friends who play professionally overseas and am still close to many of the guys I played with and against in college. I know the game and I discuss it with them on a fairly regular basis (the local guys). That’s why it trips me out to see some of what you all say in here. The VERY LAST thing that any of them talk about are these stats you guys harp on. They talk about who brings it and who doesn’t. And I don’t mean bring it as in playing on edge all the time like Nocioni. I mean bring it like who comes to the table with a mix of supreme skill and determination. Who is REALLY real and who ain’t sh!t. And everybody’s favorite person Luol Deng comes up from time to time. He is an underachiever by almost any measure. He simply is not as good as he should be and it’s a view shared by quite a few.
As for the rest of your post…….
….see me whenever partna!! Send me a private message if you really got something to say.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 5:20 PM CST up reply actions
what can I tell you
this blog isn’t for everyone.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:24 PM CST up reply actions
No, you ain't for everyone.
And neither am I. But that’s alright because a lot of folks agree with you…and some folks here agree with me. So when you see my posts, just skip over them. There is a small portion of bloggers here who see the same things I do when they watch the games. I’ll talk to them because we can agree on some things and disagree on other things without attempting to insult anyone’s intelligence.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 5:27 PM CST up reply actions
If anyone's insulting your intelligence...
…it’s you.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
not quite. And it's not just semantics
there’s one blogger here. Everybody else can join, yet only remain via my permission. So, we are not on equal playing fields.
I have no problem with you spouting nonsense (my opinion, of course), but when you repeat yourself constantly it’s getting close to confrontational. That’s not acceptable. Not the confrontational part, but combining it with nonsense. Sadly that part is open to (my) interpretation, but it is the burden I must bear.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
Look BullsBlogger.
I’m not a computer genius. I thought we all blogged. Whatever though.
If you don’t want me on here then just delete my account. I mean it’s a lot of fun arguing with you guys and everything, but i ain’t gonna sit here and read personal insults from you and others (namely tyger) then read where you virtually threaten to kick me off when i say something back.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
just calm down some
and everyone’s happy
the confrontational tone incites confrontation. it’s pretty simple.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Better to be silent and thought a fool...
…than to speak up and remove all doubt.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
The thing of it is....
……that it simply doesn’t matter what you or anyone else thinks when it comes to me Tyger. You already know that though seeing as though we’ve had our bouts on here as well.
But I don’t appreciate some of the personal remarks some of you make. But I understand all too well that when people have nothing sensible to say they resort to insults as you and your friend BullsBlogger have done….and as i did the other day on this very topic for that matter and I owe FundamentallySound an apology for doing so because he commented on it. But it’s all good though.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 5:36 PM CST up reply actions
I don't mean to make personal insults on your intelligence in general
just insults regarding your intelligence regarding this topic.
That may not be much consolation, but I mean that sincerely. I strive to keep conversation within the confines of this team and the NBA, the insults should only extend that far as well.
That’s why I really don’t care at all about your background. At. all. I don’t know you, don’t want to know you.
So talk about Deng. My only issue is that you say the same thing 50 times and that gets on my nerves.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
and when talking about intelligence
maybe I shouldn’t say ‘regarding’ too much. argh.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:42 PM CST up reply actions
But what I do is bring another level of perspective...
…to your blog. The things I say here is what they call, “What’s hot in the streets”. I’m bringing that perspective here. I’m not worried about John Hollinger or any of the other writers that have never donned a uniform and have never had to go to battle when the stakes were high with a guy like Deng. That’s what I do. Some like it, some don’t. But it’s your blog and your rules. I can dig that.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 5:46 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, but...
…you’ve yet to name one player who has ever donned the same uniform as Deng who didn’t want to go to battle with him (cuz, you know, basketball is like a real battle and all that). And of course, in the biggest threatdown of his young career, the Miami playoff series, when the stakes were VERY HIGH, he came up huge.
Quite frankly, you don’t know what you’re talking about here. Even though you’re convinced you do.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
The fact that you continue to talk...
…about the Miami series that happened almost 3 years ago illustrates my point. What has he done for me lately? Nothing!! Neither has BG, or Kirk, or any bull for that matter. Let there be NO DISPUTING the fact that Deng was INCREDIBLE in that series (and did a decent job against the Pistons in the next series as well). But that was long ago. Where is that level of play now? Why does he not bring that all the time? I just point to Luol more so because many here have no problem holding Gordon, Hinrich, etc.. accountable but Deng gets to skate here most nights. I just hate where we are now. A little too good to be considered a bad team, but not good enough to be considered a good team. And like everybody else here, I’m sick of rebuilding…but it looks like that’s where we are again. The mediocre middle.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 6:25 PM CST up reply actions
difference is now
Deng gets a lot of flac around here, this post ripping Deng seems to be everyones favorite thing around.
We are actually rebuilding now, as opposed to what ever the hell we wasted last season doing. Feels just as ugly, hopefully be a lot more productive.
Deng had a horrible night
last night against the Clips. But, he must have had a little "dog in him, hitting a couple "clutch jumpers.
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 18, 2008 1:01 PM CST up reply actions
Exactly.
Even as bad as he was all game, he still had enough grittiness and streetness too come up in overtime.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
No doubt Deng showed up in the overtime period and....
…as Bulls fans we should all thank him for doing so. We don’t win that game without his 2 baskets in OT. But as I said in a post last night, that doesn’t excuse the fact that he had a very poor game. Along with that, people have killed Rose, Gordon and Nocioni (who all had better games than did Deng and all came up big down the stretch) and have yet again let Deng slide after a subpar game. Regarding last night though, If he has a better game then I’m pretty sure we’d have won in regulation. But that’s beside the point and really doesn’t matter because the game did go into overtime and the Bulls did what they had to in order to pull out a win. Deng definitely came up HUGE when it counted last night and we need him to continue doing that on a nightly basis. Who would disagree with that?
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 2:47 PM CST up reply actions
I was joking
He sucked last night. If he had played better, there wouldn’t have been an overtime.
The last game he went 7-8 and played fairly solid D, he had a good game, but got rode for not performing in the clutch. Now he plays crap, but pulls it out in the last few minutes and it is okay….?
I like Deng I believe he is an above average player. A solid 3rd option. Quit riding him because he doesn’t take over the game. Maybe he can’t take over a game on his own.
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 18, 2008 2:53 PM CST up reply actions
He has the physical tools to do so benny....
…and on this team it would benefit us greatly if he would. It could change the way we move forward as a franchise if Deng emerges and becomes the player he can truly be.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:18 PM CST up reply actions
That's your right tyger.
We go back a bit with the posts Tyger and I think you’re just trying to argue…LOL.
If given the choice though, I believe you’d take a Deng that makes his presence felt on the court every single night in some way or another. That’s what upsets me so much. I mean, if I thought he was Brad Sellers (there’s REAL unrealized potential for you right there) or somebody then I wouldn’t give two sh!ts if he showed up or not. But I KNOW that Deng is better than that. I see it and I hear about it pretty often.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:36 PM CST up reply actions
During the whole game?
Sure. In crunch time? Every night? That’s what Rose and Gordon are for. He’s a friggin third option. Hold him to that standard and you won’t be disappointed.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
I can't lie
I have little interest in that perspective and I think it’s mostly silliness.
Doesn’t mean you can’t give it. Doesn’t mean I won’t mock it.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 5:49 PM CST up reply actions
That's your prerogative...
…and you are entitled to feel how you want. That’s your right. But again, I’m telling you what basketball players talk about and the truth is when the cameras are off and the microphones are dead, that’s when you hear the truth about how players feel about each other and I got news for you all….everybody isn’t enamored by Mr. Nice Guy. If only people here knew the truth about how a lot of his peers feel. I’m not saying he’s a bad guy. Far from it. Luol Deng gets in no legal trouble and has no babies mamas. None of that junk at all. He is nothing but a stand up guy in that sense and he is to be commended for it because Lord knows there is plenty of that in the NBA…hell in all of sports for that matter. But he isn’t the guy on this team that many of you think he is. Especially since he became the newly minted highest paid Bull ever. Many around the league and even a few of his teammates don’t think as highly of him as a lot of you here do. That’s all I’m trying to say.
I have said on several occassions that I saw Deng as the next Grant Hill so I was probably higher on him than anyone here. Hell, I’m a Dookie and I STILL think he can be much better!! But talking to some of my buddies over the past couple years has caused me to take an extra careful look at Deng’s game. Maybe it’s jaded me because I see things and I’m like Damn, so and so told me he would do this in situations like that.
Again though, nothing personal against Deng. I just have a different perspective than many of you here. BullsBlogger, what insights do you have? I was under the impression that you do some traveling with the team and speaking to the players. Now if they know what you do they’ll be less likely to be candid, but still in being so close to them I know you can glean some inside stuff.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 6:08 PM CST up reply actions
ha!
I have absolutely no interpersonal insights and am not close with the players or the organization (or much of humanity, to be honest).
Just a fan with a keyboard and monitor, as you put it.
USE THE SOFTWARE. Actions-> Rec/Flag. Reply to comments with the reply button. Rec good fanposts/fanshots so the crud gets pushed down.
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 17, 2008 6:16 PM CST up reply actions
Good God Almighty.
Sorry, but I think I’m going to have to keep my rep, bro. If you graduated in ’93, that makes you around 33 years old.
You’re talking about “the streets” as a 33 year-old?
No one cares about “what’s hot in the streets.” I only care about what’s “hot” in the Bulls organization.
My goodness NittanyCub!!
When I say “Word on the streets” I’m not actually talking about the streets that we drive on and the blocks that we hang out on. When I say that, I’m referring to what they guys WHO CURRENTLY PLAY THE GAME AND ARE IN THE KNOW talk about when I converse with them. So I am talking about what’s hot in the Bulls organization…and at times others. Unbelievable!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 2:42 PM CST up reply actions
So you talk to Bulls players?
I did not realize that’s what you’re talking about. Can you share some information on what they think of other players?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
No current Bulls players, but...
… i do know Pete Myers fairly well and a handful of current and past players in the league…and believe me when i say they talk….about EVERYTHING AND EVERYBODY!!!
I mention in an earlier post that maybe I’m jaded because of what I hear some players say about Deng. Everybody (and I do mean EVERYBODY) acknowledges that he’s talented. That’s undeniable and has never been in question. But in general, guys just don’t think he gets the most out of his abilities. Some wonder if he has the drive to be a great player. That’s what’s known in basketball circles as “Having that DOG in him”. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t work hard. He is a gym rat and his work ethic cannot be questioned at all. What can be questioned though is what he works on…and finally his mentality on the court. For instance, it’s plain to see that guys like Gordon (with all his lack of emotion) and Rose have much more impact on most nights. Sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse. But you will ALWAYS know that a guy like Ben is on the court for one reason or another. Deng on the other hand seems too content to just be there. That would be fine on a better team. But if we are going to be worth a damn we need Deng to be a big time impact player every night. The consensus is that he doesn’t make his presence felt nearly enough. I didn’t always agree with this assessment, but the more I watched Deng the more I began to see what they were talking about.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:14 PM CST up reply actions
So Pete Myer's talks bad about Deng?
Interesting. Like, he wouldn’t want to “go to battle” with him?
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Please tell me where I say Pete...
…talk bad about Deng. Where in God’s name did you get that from Tyger??? In his position he wouldn’t do that even if he didn’t like Deng (which i know is not the case), BUT he does freely admit that the Bulls need more from Deng if they plan to be more than an average team this year and next. That the staff is counting heavily on Deng taking that next step. For the sake of all Bulls fans, let’s hope he does just that.
Also, show me where I said they talk “bad” about Deng. I said they question his drive to be a dominant player despite the fact that he has the tools to do so. Last I checked, that isn’t talking bad about anybody. That’s talking REAL about somebody.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 4:00 PM CST up reply actions
I'm pretty sure he would.
Because Deng doesn’t have the “Dog” in him. At least that’s what I gather from the streets.
(when do you think he figures out that we’re making fun of him?)
That's why I keep referencing...
…you when I talk about “The Dog” Mr. NittanyCub :)
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 9:56 PM CST up reply actions
Did they show you how to use
smiley faces in the streets?
I’m pretty sure that doesn’t help your cred, dawg.
I agree with you Lex...
sort of, I like having one solid player that isn’t such a wildcard like Gordon… of course I would love it if he were more like Rose…
Really though, if he gets back to slashing and hitting midrange jumpshots, and he is the consistant player he was two years ago… then I’ll be fine.
I don’t mind him making the money he’s making and putting up a reliable 18 and 7 each night.
My name isn't Ron... I run a DJ and Karaoke business named Kidron Music... my name is Jesse...
I'd like a bit more than 18 and 7, but...
…if he gets back to CONSISTENTLY playing like he did that season then people will generally be happy with him. But as I said before, the ideal case would be more development on his part. But to get back to where he was before would be welcome.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 9:56 PM CST up reply actions
right, i know you don't care
which is part of the reason i do it. i think it’s funny and i know you’re not gonna cry about it. it’s a good time, right?
unless, of course, it really does bother you.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
My former...
brother in law was a stud high school player, who got a scholarship to a school in florida and played against, and became fairly close with guys like Bobby Simms, and several players from his draft class…
He was also, not very bright at all.
I know all kinds of guys who play ball, or who watch a lot of ball, who don’t really know much about the game. They get emotional because the relate to a player, or they like a particular style more than others. And it skews their perspective.
You hate Deng because he underachieves… which is fine. I believe you definitely have a point when you say that he hasn’t played to the best of his abilities lately. But you could have made a post, that said that, and opened it up for discussion. Instead, you have gone on about 30 different rants that all dramatically harp on Deng, and to be honest, they make your point a lot less clear.
So, to recap, your point is that you think Deng is not playing to his full potential, right? Phrase it that way, and I’m sure several people will agree.
I know Bobby.
May know your brother in law too for that matter but if he graduated around the time Bobby did then he’s a few years younger than me.
I thought the option to reply was the way to discuss things. Point taken though. But me talking about Deng is nothing new. Been on here doing it for at least 2 years…and been getting flamed by tyger and co. the whole time…LOL.
But your assessment is spot on Ron. Deng gets under my skin because I look at him and know that he should be so much more by now. He’ll obviously never be Lebron, but there is NOTHING keeping Deng from being a legitimate, no argument necessary top 3 or 4 small in the league except for himself. Some guys have the tools to be great but not the mindset. For quite a while now I’ve been feeling that way…and that’s why it upsets me to no end when I see or hear anything about how “special” Deng is. I know how “special” he can be, but he’s not now and I don’t know if he ever will be at this point.
Truthfully, what’s the difference between Deng and Carmelo Anthony? Neither is an overwhelming athlete (although Melo may be a tad bit more athletic), both about the same size, can both shoot reasonably well, etc… The only TRUE difference is their approach to the game. Carmelo’s mindset is that of wanting to take your head off. Some may call it selfishness but as NittanyCub well knows, I call it “The Dog”…LOL. But Deng just seems to settle for whatever happens. Many of you may call it letting the game come to him. No. Lebron can let the game come to him. Kobe can let the game come to him. Deng has to go and take what he wants on the court. Doesn’t mean he’s gotta be maniacal and overly aggressive. It just means that he has to be more assertive. Trust me. NOBODY on the Bulls team will mind if Deng picks it up a little on a regular basis. And when that happens I will be the FIRST person to come in here and sing his praises. If I can bash him when he underachieves, then I can and will give him his props him when he performs consistently well.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 7:26 PM CST up reply actions
Your not so wrong...
You just don’t always explain yourself well…
And you definitely don’t care what anybody says. Which is bothersome around here. Everybody that reads this blog watches Bulls games and loves basketball. So everybody knows what they are talking about for the most part. So when you make bold statements, and people spend a lot of time to counter them, and you respond with non finite phrases like, “he doesn’t have the dog”, it makes people feel like they wasted they’re time discussing things with you.
I’m not really into stats either, but they can tell you if your observations are right or wrong, you just have to look at a lot of them to get the idea. If you say Deng is average at best, and then somebody looks at several stats, and does a lot of research, and says that he is better than average, then they’re probably right. You have to accept when your observations are proved incorrect. You can always say that Deng isn’t your favorite player because you don’t like the way he plays in the fourth, and because that’s your opinion, you won’t be proven wrong.
For example, you have said that Deng is overpaid because he has a big contract and will only get you 18 and 7 and never be a superstar. Well I would say that he is paid about right then. He didn’t get the max, or really that close to it. And other guys like Iggy and Josh Smith got similar deals, and they aren’t superstars either, so what’s the problem?
I agree that Deng isn’t a good second option, which is why most of us want to sign a superstar in 2010, and since we just drafted a superstar, that leaves Deng as the third option, or we could sign&trade him in 2010 and he can be somebody else’s solid starter.
But for now, most of us have plenty of frustrations on this team besides him. Like Nocioni and his contract, or our backcourt dilemma, or our frontcourt dilemma… At least Deng has and can play better than he is now, we’re screwed with our big men and our overcrowded backcourt.
My name isn't Ron... I run a DJ and Karaoke business named Kidron Music... my name is Jesse...
Note how many former really good NBA players
make terrible NBA general managers (including the GOAT). Playing the game does not automatically impart the ability to evaluate talent.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 18, 2008 7:09 AM CST up reply actions
Exactly right!
But you know why that is? It’s because you can’t acount for what’s inside a man. Kwame Brown for instance. Body of a GOD, heart and game of a rec. league bench warmer. There is nothing that Dwight Howard can do physically that Kwame Brown couldn’t do. But Brown ain’t got none of “THAT DOG” in him. He has ZERO desire to be the player that Dwight Howard is. In fact, he is a dog. Big waste of space. Same thing for Eddy Curry. I knew when he was at Thornton that he wasn’t gonna be a great pro. Serviceable because he can put the ball in the hole. But not great because he just doesn’t love the game enough to give it his all and it would catch up to him in the league. Great players have more inward drive and passion than we can imagine and they try to pass that on to other players and it doesn’t work most times. In fact, it fails MISERABLY most times.
BUT when watching from a distance and not having a personal stake in a player or thinking they can inject the necessary passion, they can tell you who is and who isn’t worth a damn and they’re pretty spot on most times in that respect.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:31 PM CST up reply actions
What happens when they have derivates of "Dogs" in them?
Like a wolf, or a coyote? I wonder what would happen if a dog had breed—
You know what, nevermind, it’s just easier to call you stupid.
Luol Deng has a "Dog" in him,
with L, u, l, e and n left over. ;)
by Granny Waiters on Dec 18, 2008 8:49 PM CST up reply actions
MJ, Dumars and Isiah were all leaders by effort,
on championship teams, yet the first two drafted Brown and Milicic, while the latter traded for or signed a bunch of underachievers.
by Granny Waiters on Dec 18, 2008 8:54 PM CST up reply actions
Sure did.
MJ and Isiah thought they could make great players out of guys like Kwame and Stephon just from being around them, sharing their experience and passing down some of what made them great. We all know how wrong they turned out to be.
Dumars would kill you quietly. His style was different than Mike or Isiah’s…and apparently it works better than either of theirs (despite Darko…LOL). Let’s also remember that Magic wasn’t such a hot coach either. You are absolutely right though Granville that great players rarely make great coaches or executives.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 9:51 PM CST up reply actions
Let me break this down for you:
“But I should expect that from you when I’m bustin’ your head with common sense and you keep trying to throw numbers in my face supporting half hearted efforts by an average NBA player.”
A. It isn’t common sense. It is your sense. These are two different things [though, who knows, they may agree most of the time].
B. Your entire argument is that you feel – in your very bones! – that Gordon is bad. This does not, however, magically make him bad. No, only him actually playing bad basketball will do that, and since that doesn’t seem to be the case, your argument kind of falls flat. I’ve been watching Gordon this year. He’s been playing really well, getting into the lane with surprising regularity and playing pesky D.
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
Wait,
am I on the right side of this argument?
…
OK, now I’m confused. What are we talking about?
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
No No Prevenge. Not at all.
I’m a BG fan. In the posts above I was just saying that despite what numbers may or may not say, Ben Gordon is not as good as the top tier shooting guards in the league (Kobe, D-Wade, Brandon Roy and a healthy Manu in particular). Didn’t mean to give you the impression I didn’t like BG. I think Ben has been either our best or second best player so far this year. As crazy as it sounds, Gordon has definitely been our most consistent player this year and has probably been our best guard for the last couple years in spite of his struggles.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 2:55 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah, I was out of it.
It was 5:30 AM, as you can see. :P
"You remember the first time you picked up a basketball video game and you had no idea how to run plays, so you just gave the ball to your shooter and you ran around the court aimlessly until a defender was far enough away and then you jacked up a shot? THAT IS LARRY HUGHES!"
-Anonymous fan letter, heylarryhughespleasestoptakingsomanybadshots.com
I have liked you in the past because you support Gordon,
but you seem so stubbornly bent on that fact that you won’t even bother to listen some very wise people’s arguements. I’ve met people like you before, and I supremely hated them for how irrational they were. How about at least respecting the effort these people put into their arguements, which revolve around things that take effort to find and use correctly, unlike you, who believe whatever the shit you want, and trying to expand your narrow-minded to understand facts that aren’t your first thought? Like above, where Scotter calmly told you how to better use stats, instead of blowing up at you, and you mocked him. Don’t mock Scotter, he’s a very smart guy. And I don’t care if you play basketball well. Larry Hughes plays basketball well, but he couldn’t see a good shot if it danced naked in front of him wearing NittanyCub’s hat. You obviously have the same problem. Just try to not be so easily hated, will you?
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 20, 2008 2:27 AM CST up reply actions
Woah, two things:
One, I was responding to a lexdiamond0730’s post WAY up before scrolling down. Two, I’m not insulting your intelligence, I’m asking you to be reasonable.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 20, 2008 2:38 AM CST up reply actions
Again, putting words in my mouth.
Where did I say that because I played basketball well that I know things? I actually said that in college I was an average to below average performer. My perspective is based on my discussions with current and former pros and their opinions have rubbed off one me. It has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that I played. I glean some insight about what guys look for in a leader on the court and in the locker room, but besides that me playing has no bearing.
But whatever. If you think for one second that I care if anybody hates me then you’re dead wrong stupidgenius. Quite honestly I think it’s ridiculous that anybody takes is so personally that they’d hate me or anyone else who posts here. Like i’ve said several times, I bring a different perspective and just because i don’t say what you stat crunchers say you try to hate on me. I can see both sides….hell I was on the other side at one point….until some of my fellas opened my eyes…as I was making some of the same arguments I read here on BaB being made against me. The truth is the way you see things all depends on where you’re standing. I see Deng one way, you and others see him differently. I never call anyone stupid for feeling how they do but you guys refused to let me see it how I do without hurling insults. And you say I mock people and I’m narrow minded?? I beg to differ.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 21, 2008 2:00 AM CST up reply actions
I am on your side in this arguement
and I might like you if we meet in real life, but the impression I’m getting from how you act on here is that you’re not someone I’d like.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 21, 2008 11:38 AM CST up reply actions
Wow
Considering your thought process…. You must think Noc should be league MVP!
"I can accept failure, but I can't accept not trying." -- Michael Jordan
by bennythebull on Dec 17, 2008 4:40 PM CST up reply actions
Great story!
Those facts are great and very compelling. I do like Deng but that contract was terrible along with Hinrich’s. Paxson has really dug these team in a deep whole. To often are the coaches to blame, they can only work with what talent that have. With all the coaches fired the last few weeks owners should really take a closer look at there GM’s. There are alot of terrible GM’s in the NBA.
by where2hoop.com on Dec 17, 2008 12:57 PM CST reply actions
Check it out Ron.
Believe it or not, I work with a guy who bangs on Deng more than I do. Anyway, I talked to him a little bit ago and told him i was on here having dust ups about Luol Deng…again…LOL. So I check my home email just now and this article is in there from him. I read the first part in disbelief. This article and people who talk this way about Deng are a big reason I shoot him down so much. Now granted the VAST majority of people on here don’t think Deng is God’s gift to basketball. They simply think he’s an above average to star level player. I can live with that. But every now and then I come across some people and posts that seem to imply that Deng is the greatest thing since sliced bread or people that defend his play under any circumstance. That I cannot take.
Anyway, see for yourself and tell me what you think about this article (the later part talks more about his upbringing, but the early part is all basketball).
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 7:40 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
just thought i’d point out, if you actually read my original comments, they are not saying that deng is amazing or anything, just that BG is not nearly as good as you make him out to be. You have yet to say anything other than he’s good. And you’ve basically ignored the fact that Deng is a far superior defender. also, as far as just caring about winning goes, don’t give me that nonsense because Gordon is probally the most selfish bull on the team. its become public knowledge that hes mad hes not the highest paid player on the team. he clearly doesn’t care about winning, but cares about getting his paycheck. someone who cares about winning is Manu. he is far superior to BG in terms of talent, yet never complains about coming off the bench for years. BG of course cries because he wants to start and get as big a paycheck as possible.
while you may disagree with stats, telling people that you think someone is better based on watching ain’t gonna change anyones opinions because guess what… we all watch bulls games too.
Ok blademan. Whatever you say.
I don’t bother Gordon too much because he gets more than his share of hate on this blog. But I just posted something negative about him a little above this. It says:
…about the Miami series that happened almost 3 years ago illustrates my point. What has he done for me lately? Nothing!! Neither has BG, or Kirk, or any bull for that matter.
I’ll get in Ben’s ass too because he’s far from perfect. But the fact of the matter is that Ben is doing about what we all thought he’d do and has arguably been our best or second best player so far this season.
BTW, I gave Manu props in an earlier post as well. I don’t particularly like him because he flops so damn much but there is no denying that Manu is a serious ball player indeed!! Much the way I hated Karl Malone for instance but couldn’t deny his basketball prowess.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 8:25 PM CST up reply actions
You call BG selfish because he feels....
…like he should be the highest paid player on the team? Welcome to professional sports blademan88. EVERY player who is halfway decent feels like he should be the highest paid player on his team. Pros in all sports are very competitive not only on the court or on the ice or field but when it comes to negotiations as well. Gordon’s feelings about the money issue are not unusual at all and it does not make him selfish.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 8:31 PM CST up reply actions
why isn’t it as vocalized with other players? why did he make it public that he was upset he was on the bench despite the fact that it was helping the team at the time? you don’t hear anything similar to this on the celtics, and almost every one of those players is better than BG.
look at the pistons, almost everyone there is better than BG yet you don’t hear contract complaints. look at spurs, same thing.
also, http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/columns/story?columnist=ford_chad&page=freeagents-080629
to quote the important part which describes how I feel about gordon:
There isn’t a huge market for undersized 2-guards who have streaky jump shots.
OK, it's evident you don't like Gordon.
That’s fine. I have no problem with that. A lot of people don’t like Gordon and I can understand that. Everytime I see Brandon Roy play I cringe because I know we could have had him at the 2. Same thing for J.R. Smith (although Smith is a bit more of a gamble). In any event, I’m fairly happy with Gordon. I’ll say again that having undersized Gordon on the court is the least of our problems. Gordon is no all-star, but he is often a lights out shooter who can cause serious problems for the opposition at any given point in the game. Our problem is that we can’t get consistent effort from our front court against good teams and we have virtually no post offense unless Gooden gets off early like he is tonight against the Clips.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 8:55 PM CST up reply actions
On the Celtics or the Pistons...
…Ben Gordon, Luol Deng, Kirk Hinrich, etc…. would all bench players. But it seemed whenever the Bulls struggled it was blamed on Ben Gordon and he got to sit. If you’ve got Ray Allen or Richard Hamilton ahead of you and Kevin Garnett or Rasheed Wallace telling you to fall in line or be quiet I’d say that’s a bit different than sitting behind Chris Duhon/Kirk Hinrich and having Joe Smith or somebody trying to console you about it.
Same for the Spurs. If Popovich and Duncan tell you to sit down and shut up then you better do it. They both have the cache to do that. I don’t know if you remember when Dennis Rodman played for the Spurs. He would not listen to David Robinson or anyone else on the team for that matter. Because although Robinson was an AWESOME player, he hadn’t won anything and Rodman didn’t really respect him. When Rodman came to Chicago he was far more willing to be a good teammate because he had more respect for Jordan and Pippen who had beaten his Piston team to win their first title on their way to their first 3 without him.
As for BG, if we had the team in place where we could win a championship with him being a 6th man then he would do it. But until we drafed Derrick Rose, i’m of the mind that Gordon has easily been our best guard and I’m sure that had a lot to do with him not wanting to come off the bench too. Nobody in the league wants to come off the bench but they fall in line when they’re on a team that can win it all.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 17, 2008 8:49 PM CST up reply actions
that was a very well reasoned response. More posts like this please.
by fundamentallysound on Dec 17, 2008 9:01 PM CST up reply actions
Yeah
I don’t know….
On the Celtics, maybe sure. Gordon is a lesser Ray Allen, Luol’s a lesser Pierce and Hinrich’s a lesser Rondo…
But on the Pistons…..If they kept the team today, I mgiht be inclined to split Rip/BG 50-50 and have BG get a few more minutes at PG. Those two aren’t materially better than the other. Rip’s taller, Ben’s just as good a defender, and Ben’s more explosive, but Rip’s more consistent. Rip’s been a 2 time all star, but he’s also been on a much better team….which helps him both be consistent and help his stats given the weapons.
Kirk would sit behind either Billups or A.I. though….
Luol vs Tayshawn though would be interesting. Boht do a lot of the little things. Deng’s the more talented player though and while Tayshawn might have been the better player to date, I might be more inclined to start Deng over Prince….not a knock on Tayshawn as both are materially in line….but soon Luol will overtake Prince. Prince though is the better defender and might get more burn than Deng in the playoffs (I’d split this 50-50 as well but would put Luol in because Luol can and will still improve subtletly—and I’m a Prince fan mind you)….
Holy fuck, that guy must be on this:
A delicate balance of cocaine, heroin, marijuana, a bit of tobacco, all drenched in straight tequilla.
Things could be worse. We could have kept (name redacted).
by stupidgenius on Dec 20, 2008 3:00 AM CST up reply actions
On a team like the Pistons though....
….Deng could settle nicely into the small forward slot because they had so many solid established vets they could lean on and Deng would be as complimentary as it gets. Billups (when he was there), Rasheed, Rip and then Deng could slide nicely into that 4th option spot and would be UNBELIEVABLE there. I don’t know how many of you know this, but Deng basically makes the same money that Tayshaun makes. But the reason nobody jumps all over Prince the way they jump over Deng is that Prince is undeniably the 4th option on a team with established vets. Deng is now the highest paid Bull ever on a team of relatively young guys still trying to find their way. Add to that all the pre-season fanfare and lump that with a few expectations being placed of the highest paid guy on any team (except Stephon “The Cancer” Marbury of course) and you get the perfect storm.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 3:04 PM CST reply actions
Sincere question:
is Derrick Rose viewed as “having the dog” in him?
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
No doubt!!
What you will see with Rose as the season and the years pass is a young man who asserts himself more as he gets more comfortable with his role on the team. By all accounts, he goes out of his way to be one of the guys. The last thing he wants to be seen as is a prima donna…not by the fans but by his own teammates (That’s in line with how he was in high school and in college). But when he really settles in and gets comfortable, there hasn’t been a team yet that he hasn’t CLEARLY become the leader of. Simeon, Mean Streets AAU, and Memphis. In each case he strives to fit in and gain the full trust and confidence of all his teammates. When that happens, Derrick Rose really puts his stamp on the team and takes over and I’m certain he’ll do the exact same thing with the Bulls when he’s ready.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 9:46 PM CST up reply actions
That's
part of the reason I’m not alarmed – in the least – about his passive play as of late. And I think that “killer instinct” (which is another way to phrase what you’re saying) was on display at Golden State, Dallas (preseason), and generally in the fourth quarters of games.
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
What Bulls fans will find...
…is that Rose is a lot like Jason Kidd in that he can go for big numbers from time to time, but he can also play a game and finish with about 10 points and have a bigger impact on the game than anyone. Best of all though, he rises to the occasion. He’s gonna be a great leader for us in the years to come.
I regularly hear C-Webb and G.P say that he reminds them of Rod Strickland. I don’t know if a lot of guys here know how good Rod was when he was at his best which was at DePaul and again oddly enough in his late 20’s (Maybe that has something to do with the fact that Rod was one of his coaches at Memphis). But Rose is a far superior athlete and much less of a knucklehead than Rod was. Besides that though, I agree with that assessment. Rod could get anywhere on the court he wanted because he was so savvy. Wait till Rose gains that…along with all that athleticism….it’s gonna be crazy!!!
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 10:19 PM CST up reply actions
My bad. Meant to relate D. Rose playing like Strickland to Rod having been his coach.
I thought I was talking about Rose and DePaul for some reason (I would have loved that, but I don’t think he could have lead the Blue Demons to the NCAA Championship game…LOL). Put the info in the parentheses in the wrong place. My bad.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 18, 2008 10:21 PM CST up reply actions
The strickland comparison
is interesting; I’ve only seen tape of Rod, and in terms of quickness they remind me of each other quite a bit. But Rod was a wisp out there. I’ve always thought “Baron Davis with his head right” was a good way to model Derrick’s game, as it has more of Baron’s vertical explosiveness and size.
It’s always interesting to hear what the players think of each other, because it does impact the game.
The poster formerly known as Freethefro.
Wow. You're so brilliant. You bring something that's been lacking here and sorely needed.
I’m joking, of course.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
Of you're a joke course Tyger.
I’m glad you realized that about yourself.
You sound like the true hater around here T.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 20, 2008 10:33 AM CST up reply actions
Rose is a healthy and non-ver-eating Baron Davis.
That’s my comparison. I’m still not seeing the Kidd comparisons since he’s a better shooter than Kidd already, and hasn’t really shown the super-flashy passing yet.
Viva la nuance! Reading comprehension rules!!!
It has nothing to do with super flashy passing.
Rose and Kidd both have good size, neither will obliterate you with their outside shooting but are still very dangerous and are capable of beating you from the outside if you dare them to, both are very unselfish leaders, Kidd was easily one of the better players in the league getting out in transition because of his amazing quickness (far more so when he was with Dallas the 1st time, Phoenix and New Jersey), and Rose is quickly establishing himself as the same type of guy. Now Rose isn’t the rebounder or defender that Kidd was early in his career, but they have plenty in common.
Does he remind me a bit of B.D as well? Of course. Like Davis, he is an explosive high level athlete at the PG position. PG’s aren’t supposed to be as athletic as these 2 are…LOL. But the difference between the two is that Baron Davis is much more likely to beat you by scoring 25 points than by raising the level of play of all his teammates and only finishing with 10 or so points himself. I look at Derrick Rose and I see Jason Kidd in the #32 Phoenix Suns jersey all over (again with the exception of Rose being a FAR superior athlete). Either way, there is no shame in being compared to Jason Kidd or Baron Davis (who when healthy and motivated is quite possibly the most unstoppable PG in the game today). Both are great guards.
by lexdiamonds0730 on Dec 20, 2008 10:29 AM CST up reply actions
Girl, you know it's true...
My name isn't Ron... I run a DJ and Karaoke business named Kidron Music... my name is Jesse...
…Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its……Girl you know its… … Girls you knows its… (Nittany Cub and LexDiamonds sheepishly run off stage right, with the whole world now exposed to their grammy winning ruse…)
My name isn't Ron... I run a DJ and Karaoke business named Kidron Music... my name is Jesse...
by kidronmusic on Dec 18, 2008 8:27 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
This thread sure went south
Vinny Del Negro interviewed for the job today. I mean come on! Nobody else thinks this is nuts?
by Juiceboxjerry on Jun 6, 2008 4:21 PM CDT actions actions 0 recs
by Ozzie Montana on Dec 18, 2008 10:35 PM CST up reply actions
Ok.
1. Look at all the guys getting paid about the same amount as Deng, they are all pretty unappealing aside from a few gems—Caron, Calderon, etc.
2. Your player classifications are much too dependent on offense. Duncan is a superstar and one could argue that Ginobilli is superstar caliber—Garnett and Pierce are superstars—the Pistons had a superstar in Ben Wallace and another “takeover” player in Prince. It takes a lot more than your categorizations suggest, to win a championship.
3. You note his scoring comes from the inside and then complain about the amount of shots that are assisted…that doesn’t seem like a surprising correlation.
I realize the bright glitter of statistics infers depth; but we must be rid of phantasms to see true light.
nice post
i gotta say that original post was really well put and actually gives a glimpse of hope for the Bulls becoming contenders over the next 20 months.
Luol seems to be working on the "he's not injury-prone, they were just flukes!" myth
De gustibus non est disputandum
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
