Five Year Championship Window

This RealGM ranking is a good idea, since whether or not you're positioning for a championship run is what ultimately matters. They rank the Bulls 10th in the league behind obvious next-year contenders like Lakers, Magic, Celtics and upstarts like Blazers, OKC and stretches like the Knicks (!).

That feels about right, but if we had a better front-office with Rose and possible cap space we should be higher -- but then BaB has covered the 2010 "whiff" worries all summer...

over 2 years ago RichKarp 28 comments 0 recs |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

It annoys me

That OKC counts as an upstart. It’s a talented team, but not a good one. Their record last year was .280, they were not good and that was with Durant having an amazing year.

"I skim a LOT of what gets said here
in a race to put in a smirky retort."
-your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 16, 2009 4:52 PM EDT

by Jamaicanpi on Sep 18, 2009 10:28 AM CDT reply actions

Eh it's close

I guess it comes down to who you’d rather have, Derrick Rose or Kevin Durant.

Durant, suprisingly, is 5 days younger than Rose. Who has the better chance of being a superstar?

by YaoPau on Sep 18, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions

Durant is already better than Rose and he's younger. Granted, Durant has been in the league

an extra year and plays the easier position to adjust to, so who knows which one will be better long term. But, if making the bet today, simple logic says you bet on the guy who’s better at the moment, because odds are he stays better.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions

Why is Durant better?

He was Kevin Martin last year, an efficient high-usage scorer who doesn’t involve his teammates. Rose didn’t score efficiently but did involve his teammates. Offensively I’d say they were really close, and defensively they both suck.

by YaoPau on Sep 18, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions

Durant was loads better at scoring AND carried a heavier usage burden. That's significant.

And you’re overstating the degree to which Rose involved his teammates to make your point. Also, there’s something to be said for roles. Derrick was mediocre at getting his teammates involved for a PG. Same for Durant as a wing. It just happens to be that Rose plays a position where he, by the nature of the position, gets more opportunity to involve teammates because that’s what the plays call for. Durant’s job is to score, and he’s better at his job, right now, than Derrick is at his.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions

The flipside, though

is that Durant plays a position that gets more opportunity to make an impact defensively, and by most (all?) accounts, he’s been terrible.

As for carrying a heavier usage burden, that’s true, but Rose carries a heavier load of the offense because of his assist numbers. Assuming the two continue to develop for a handful more years, chances are Rose will continue to be relied on more by his offense than Durant. So I don’t see an overstatement here. If anything, Durant’s value to his offense is overstated, because he’s only directly involved (by shooting or passing to a shooter) just over 1/3 of the time.

by YaoPau on Sep 18, 2009 2:49 PM CDT up reply actions

Citing defense for your argument that Rose is better than Durant is laughable.

Rose played some of the worst defense in the league last year and probably the worst PG defense I’ve ever seen. Durant’s defense isn’t good, but it’s nowhere near as bad as Rose’s. Durant grabs defensive boards and blocks shots at a pretty good rate for a wing, so he’s at least doing some positive things. Rose’s defensive rebounding rate for a guard (especially one with his athleticism) was mediocre to bad, he doesn’t block shots or get steals, and he hadn’t a clue about how to defend the pick and roll. Durant’s defense is mediocre to bad, Rose’s defense was a total disaster.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 3:39 PM CDT up reply actions

I'll trust your scouting on Rose's defense

since you watched a lot of him. Plus I agree, Rose is terrible at defense.

Oklahoma City games are barely on tv here, so I’m not sure where you’re getting your “Durant’s defense is nowhere near as bad as Rose’s” info from. His defensive boards and blocked shots aren’t evidence of anything, and your own APM post has Durant’s defense at -3.77 while Rose’s is at -1.70.

Besides, citing defense in any argument about who’s better isn’t laughable, it’s half the game.

by YaoPau on Sep 18, 2009 4:08 PM CDT up reply actions

My point was more that Rose's defense should win him no favors

against anyone, least of all Derrick Rose. With respect to Durant’s defense, yes, APM says he sucks, and generally speaking, I think that’s pretty damning, but having watched Rose, I can’t imagine anyone playing worse defense than him. And yes, defensive rebounding is a BIG part of defense. If you prevent the other team from getting extra shots, you increase your chances of preventing them from scoring and thus increase your chances of winning.

Derrick’s defense is simply horrid. Durant’s defense is very bad, but it is in no way worse than Derrick’s and Durant is better than him on offense, by a fairly big margin. So Durant is better. Which is the point I’ve made from the beginning.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 5:39 PM CDT up reply actions

least of all Kevin Durant*

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions

So your argument is

I can’t imagine anyone playing worse defense than [Rose].

Since neither of us have seen much of Durant’s defense, let’s agree that they’re both terrible regardless of position, since the stats don’t really say one way or another who’s more terrible.

But if we’re throwing out positional differences defensively (NBA SF’s having a bigger positive impact defensively than PGs, an argument that would help Rose’s case), we also throw out positional differences offensively, namely your argument that Rose’s assists come as a result of the “nature of the position”. Instead of rating them relative to their position, let’s rate them relative to the entire league.

And when you do it that way, you can’t possibly say

Durant is better than him on offense, by a fairly big margin.

It’s simply not true. Durant’s a better scorer, but Rose is the better passer. It’s Michael Vick vs. Donovan McNabb: one guy tries to do it himself, the other uses his teammates. And any APM/statistical APM would show the same: that they’re very similar offensively.

You said earlier that

Durant’s job is to score

But that’s not his job. His job on offense is to make the offense better, and right now, basically the only way he’s doing that is via his scoring.

by YaoPau on Sep 19, 2009 12:27 AM CDT up reply actions

the only reason to throw out positional differences on defense

is because defense is difficult to quantify and because, admittedly, both of us have watched little of Durant’s defense. Offense isn’t, and Derrick Rose was not as efficient as Kevin Durant. He just wasn’t. PER shows it, ORtg shows it, TS% shows it.

You’re really trying to do an interesting dance in the argument and bending the rules to get to an answer where Rose is somehow the equal of Durant, he’s not. Not yet anyway.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 19, 2009 2:29 AM CDT up reply actions

I should note that ORtg includes assists in the calculation

and even with that Rose doesn’t make up the difference in efficiency.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 19, 2009 2:31 AM CDT up reply actions

Well he is the equal

Point guards, by nature, have higher impacts on the offense than small forwards. Relative to their position, Durant is the better offensive player. But when you look beyond positions and measure who’s actually helping their team more offensively, they’re close. As for the stats you cite:

- PER grossly underrates passing. For years Hollinger was trying to say that Amare meant more to the Phoneix offense than Nash, when we now know that’s completely wrong.

- ORtg grossly overrates shooting efficiency. I’m not sure how a stat that has Biedrins and Noah as two of the league’s most efficient players got to be so widely used when Biedrins and Noah barely improve the efficiency of their offense. I know you love the stat but I don’t see the value of it. Oliver’s “player efficiency” has almost no correlation to “team efficiency”.

- TS% is important, but it’s just one of a bunch of important offensive stats. Durant shot 57.7% on 21.9 attempts last year, giving him 25.3ppg. Had he shot the league average (54.4%) instead, he would’ve averaged 23.9ppg. So all his high usage, high efficiency scoring is only helping his team by 1.4ppg against the league average.

1.4ppg is significant, and when comparing it to Rose, we’ll add the .9 points Rose is giving away relative to the league based on his .516 TS%, for a total of a 2.3ppg swing. Now, it doesn’t take “interesting dances” and “rule bending” to argue that Rose’s huge lead in AST% (28.8% to Durant’s 13.5%) can make up 2.3ppg. Not only are Rose’s 6.3apg leading directly to 7 Bulls points each game (and granted, some of Rose’s passes lead to misses too), but the higher AST% also assumes Rose is swinging the ball more on plays which eventually lead to a bucket even though Rose may not get the assist, a fair assumption considering how often the ball is in Rose’s hands.

Does Rose’s passing advantage net him a 2.3ppg edge on Durant? A 2.8ppg edge? A 1.7ppg edge? Who knows for sure, but just because Durant is really good at one part of the game doesn’t mean he’s better offensively.

by YaoPau on Sep 19, 2009 10:01 AM CDT up reply actions

I guess we're not going to agree on this, and I've no

interest in continuing to try to convince you of something that seems obvious to me, but you clearly disagree.

One last point I’ll make is this. One of Derrick’s biggest weaknesses is that he doesn’t get to the line. This has two effects (1) it decreases his own scoring efficiency and (2) it makes it less likely that the opposing team goes into the penalty and gets his own teammates more FTAs. Kevin Durant, on the other hand, gets to the line 7.1 times per game, whereas Rose only gets to the line 3.1 times per game. So that’s an extra two fouls (or so) that Durant is drawing per game. Those things add up. Every extra foul he draws is one closer to putting the other team in the penalty. Those points add up too. So you can really go round and round on this stuff.

And your use of AST% misses the point of AST% entirely. It measures passing role, which is a function of position. That’s why I brought up roles in the first place. But you chose to ignore it because it didn’t support your conclusion that Rose is somehow as good as Durant.

Looking at where they rank amongst their positional peers, we get this picture, ahead of Rose in AST% at the PG position are:

1. Chris Paul, 54.5%
2. Deron Williams, 47.8%
3. Steve Nash, 42.4%
4. Jose Calderon, 41.0%
5. Tony Parker, 40.1%
[Dwyane Wade, 40.3%, debatable whether he’s really a PG]
6. Rajon Rondo, 39.7%
7. Baron Davis, 38.1%
8. Jason Kidd, 34.7%
9. Ramon Sessions, 34.6%
10. Devin Harris, 34.4%
11. Raymond Felton, 31.1%
12. Andre Miller, 30.2%
13. Chauncey Billups, 28.9%
14. Derrick Rose, 28.8%

Whereas, Durant, at his position has the following people ahead of him in AST%:

1. LeBron James, 38.0%
2. Stephen Jackson, 25.6%
3. Hedo Turkoglu, 22.4%
4. Mike Miller, 21.6%
5. Boris Diaw, 21.2%
6. Caron Butler, 19.7%
7. Carmelo Anthony, 18.1%
8. Paul Pierce, 16.3%
9. Ron Artest, 16.2%
10. Matt Barnes, 14.2%
11. Dominic McGuire, 13.8%
12. Tayshaun Prince, 13.8%
13. Kevin Durant, 13.5%

So Rose is 14th on the list of PGs playing at least 2000 minutes in terms of AST%, whereas Durant is 13th on the list of SFs in terms of AST%. Since, AST% measures passing role, more than passing ability, it seems that Durant within his role at SF is a very slightly better passer than Rose is at PG. It’s simply ridiculous that you’re arguing that because Rose has a higher AST% as a freakin’ point guard that he’s better on offense or the equal on offense of Durant. That’d be like me saying that because Durant is a much better rebounder than Rose [which is, of course, true] that he’s more valuable. You’re reaching, YaoPau. Really reaching.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 19, 2009 2:25 PM CDT up reply actions

Point guards have the ball most on offense

Rose touches the ball so much more often than Durant, or any non-PG except the LeBrons/Wades. Why would it surprise you that Rose could have the same offensive impact as Durant while being less efficient? If I make 100 sales calls a year and you make 80, you can be more efficient than me and our contribution to the company could still be the same. It’s the same reason why so few centers register strong offensive APMs.

The argument then is “it’s easier to replace Rose’s offense than Durant’s”, but the flipside is more is expected defensively from SFs than what Durant seems to be providing. That’s all, no stretching :)

by YaoPau on Sep 19, 2009 3:12 PM CDT up reply actions

Sigh.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 19, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions

I guess if we're an upstart.

Might as well label them one as well.

Somone’s going to have to make the playoffs when the Spurs, Mavs, Suns all eventually rebuild.

The 2009 White Sox....like a 40 degree day.

by Ozzie Montana on Sep 18, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions

They are talented and good but inexperienced. I can see them winning around 35 this year

by C Smoove on Sep 18, 2009 12:22 PM CDT reply actions

durant is a beast

why hate?

The only way you can avoid making a mistake is not to make a decision . Our Owner´s philosophy-

by Belize on Sep 18, 2009 1:40 PM CDT reply actions

I know John Wall is being projected as a potential great player

but can he at least play one college game before people start making him a franchise player? It just seems a little premature how he keeps throwing him out there as the guy who will change the fortunes of a time. He very well might, I just think we need to at least see him play at Kentucky first.

"I've missed more than 9,000 shots in my career. I've lost almost 300 games. Twenty six times, I've been trusted to take the game winning shot and missed. I've failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."- Michael Jordan

by bigballa10 on Sep 18, 2009 2:34 PM CDT reply actions

Meant to say the fortunes of a team

not time

by bigballa10 on Sep 18, 2009 2:35 PM CDT up reply actions

Isn't John Wall pretty much the ambidexterous version of Derrick Rose? That's a filthy combo

if he lives up to his promise.

1. Cut a hole in a box
2. Put your Kirk in that box
3. Make some team open that box

by fundamentallysound on Sep 18, 2009 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions

That's what they say

He looks good in the youtube clips but then again don’t they all? I just want to see him play this year first before I believe he can turnaround an NBA franchise. OJ Mayo was awesome in HS too but he didn’t end up being the #1 pick. He’s good but he’s not going to single handedly turn the Grizzlies around.

by bigballa10 on Sep 18, 2009 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions