[From the FanPosts. A very fun and interesting read. -ed.]

The events of the last few weeks has me thinking about the Seattle Supersonics of the 1990's.  They had the #2 overall pick in the 1990 draft, which they used to select Gary Payton after Derrick Coleman went 1st overall.   Payton joined a team that had just  missed the playoffs with 41 wins after losing in the 2nd round the year before.  He also joined a team with a collection of good players, but no stars, and a raw 2nd year athletic PF in Shawn Kemp.  The Sonics made the playoffs in Payton's 1st season, the 2nd round in his 2nd seasons, and all the way to game 7 of the Western Conference finals in his 3rd season.  That 3rd season was the beginning of a six year run where the Sonics won at least 55 games, averaging 59.5 wins.  They finished in the top ten in both offensive and defensive efficiency every season.  According to Basketball-Reference's rating system, the Sonics never finished with worse than the league's 3rd best regular season during the six year run.  These Sonics had some famous playoff failures, most notably losing to the 8th seed Nuggets in 1994 only eclipsed by the Mavericks exiting the 1st round at the hand of the Warriors.  Still the Sonics were good enough to compete for a championship and with different fortune could have won one.  And there's some similarities to what the Bulls are now trying to accomplish.

Gary Payton is a different player than Derrick Rose, but there are some similarities in terms of being a PG with physical advantages, but not a developed jumpshot.  But, the bigger similarity is that the Bulls are asking Rose to do what Payton did.  To join a team with established playoff level talent as a somewhat raw top 2 overall draft  pick and become not only the best player on the team, but also the team leader.  It took Payton time.  He didn't average double digit points per game until his third season.  He only had a PER of 13 in his 1st two years.  And only averaged 13.5 points and 4.9 assists when the Sonics went to the Western Conference Finals in his third year.  It wasn't until his fifth season that Payton established himself as both the best player on the team and the team leader.  I don't think it will take Rose that long, but if he struggles Payton is an example to keep in mind.  Seattle also did the right thing by starting him the entire time and playing him close to 30 minutes per game even during those 1st two seasons.

Last summer I wrote about Shawn Kemp having what was really the only similar rookie season to Tyrus Thomas.  A comparison that was more interesting because of their similarities as raw 20 year old athletic power forwards.  Those similarities were actually still present, despite Tyrus's disappointing 2nd season and Kemp's solid 15 and 8 2nd season.   But,  that's it's own fanpost.  Let me summarize by saying that a Shawn Kemp like impact is still possible for Tyrus.  And I see the Bulls future success tied to Rose and Thomas in the same way that Seattle's was tied to Payton and Kemp.

In addition Deng is actually a pretty similar player to Detlef Schrempf in terms of never being an effective #1 offensive option or efficiently averaging 20+ points per game.  But, Deng like Schrempf can be a very efficient 3rd option averaging close to 20 points per game.  Schrempf shot a very good 3 point %, but never took many 3 point shots.  It's that type of role where's he's the third best player on the team that's perfect for Deng.

I also find it interesting what Seattle did with with the SG position.  While Payton and Kemp were getting up to speed, Seattle relied on a one dimensional scorer in Ricky Pierce to be the team's leading scorer.  In the 2nd half of Seattle's run, Seattle used a former 20 point per game scorer and undersized SG in Hersey Hawkins as a very efficient fourth option.  If you're primarily a shooter, it's easier to make that transition from 1st option to 3rd or 4th option like Ray Allen did last season.  If Gordon is re-signed then I'd anticipate that type of evolution in role.  If the team is winning, while Gordon's role decreases I think he'll be fine.  And if not then he's a much easier to replace when the team needs less scoring from that position a few years from now.  If I'm Paxson, I think hard about paying Gordon more to get him on a shorter three year contract.  The team does need his scoring in the short term.

Seattle's big problem has been the center position ever since my third cousin left for Milwaukee in 1986.  In addition to George Karl mixing and matching Sam Perkins with the likes of Benoit Benjamin, Michael Cage, Ervin Johnson, Bill Cartwright, and Jim McIlvaine in their quest for a starting center.  If only they had been able to draft Mouhamed Sene a decade earlier.  This is where Noah can be difference maker.  One of the reasons for Seattle's problems in the playoffs is that despite being a top ten defense, they were a below average defensive rebounding team.  In the playoffs where it's harder to force turnovers, defensive rebounding becomes more important.  That shouldn't be a problem area for the Bulls as it wasn't over the last few years, finishing in the top ten from 04/05 through 06/07, and nearly everyone in the rotation is at least an average defensive rebounder for their position.

I thought these were interesting similarities.  I'm not suggesting Seattle is a blue print to follow, but it's an interesting precedent for what the Bulls are trying to do over the next couple of years.  There are some similar dynamics at work.  Obviously if there is a 2010 free agent miracle then the complexion of the team will greatly change.  But, I think starting lineup of Rose, Gordon, Deng, Thomas, and Noah works.  They'll be some obvious differences at the individual level, but the sum of the parts could be something very similar to what the Sonics had in terms of overall impact.  Anyway, I thought it was a comparison worth making.