note: previous post was lost/deleted. i dont know what happened so here it is again. or if the admin deleted b/c of a particular reason, my bad for putting it back up.
I love Derrick Rose. I just need to put that out there before I move on with this fanpost. I need everyone to realize this before they read this article. I love watching him more than Blake Griffin because Derrick has grace. Blake is brute strength. He's like a rampaging bull. One that defies gravity mind you, but not that pretty. He's awesome to watch, but not like D.Rose. Derrick makes the game beautiful to watch. He seems to glide in the air and effortlessly roam in and out of the paint. He makes music with that orange, leather ball. He is my favorite basketball player and I am a diehardBulls fan (remember those sentences at the end of this post).
But... D.Rose is not the best player in the league nor the best PG in the league nor the clear MVP frontrunner. He is a top 10 NBA player (I currently rank him ninth on my personal list), a top 5 PG (3rd on my list), and a prime MVP candidate in a year when no one has run away with it (it is a dead heat/tie at the top with Derrick, LeRetard, Dwight, and CP3). The statement will anger many and arouse the ire of a few. But it's the truth (in my humble opinion).
(on a side not, i do not consider lebaby to be egomanical, evil, or whatever we think of him nowadays. i just think he's dumb. he pretty much admitted as much; "That's crazy, because I had no idea what the word 'contraction' meant before I saw it on the Internet," James said after the Heat's practice Monday." i think he's like a child who just won't learn and continues to be a little brat. in this sense, i can't really hate the guy. he's not bright. you can't reallyhate stupid people. but in another sense, how can you not despise the man. its not like kg who is psychotic and whatnot and therefore we hate him but he doesn't care because he just wants to win basketball games. michael was like that. i can't take that away from kg, there's respect there. lecrap, on the another hand, just is not... a likable person is the best way to describe it i guess? i remember a post on ESPN by Bucher who said he wouldn't listen to anything from ledummy's camp. they weren't trustworthy. i think that says a lot about the man. the company he keeps. sorry about this tangent but it needed to be said. no one writes about how lecrazy's problems might be a learning disability. it could be. oh and if you haven't noticed i refuse to call him by his real name. mature? no. immensely enjoyable? yes.)
There seems to be a war brewing between the new-age mathematicians that analyze basketball and those who tend to be more empirical in their analysis, putting more weight on immeasurable characteristics like intangibles. In the end, the truth will be some perfect combination of the two but as we are not playing in a magical land where unicorns run free and elves actually make our cookies, there is no perfect. Hence, the argument arises.
I do not think that any one stat can personify a basketball player. All stats have their flaws. +/-, adjusted +/-, impact rating, O-rating, D-rating, PER (as outlined here http://skepticalsports.com/?p=1117), etc. But stats, like PER, are tools. (I'll be using PER as a representative of all of these stats because it is by far the most disseminated.) PER is not perfect, but it is something more advanced than simple per game stats. And according to PER, D.Rose is currently 13th in the league. Do I believe that Kevin Love is a better player than Derrick just because PER says so? No. Just as I don't think Monta Ellis is a better basketball player than Rose because of PPG or that Wall is better than Rose because of APG. Stats have anomalies. And advanced stats also have anomalies. I do not believe everything John Hollinger has to say because much of his inferences come from PER, his baby, his tool. Understandably he's biased. (This is a point that I will address later on in regards to Bull's fans irrational response to his chats and such.) But it is still useful and by it's measurement, Rose is not incredibly efficient. There are many times when Rose drives into the paint and ends up throwing up a crazy circus shot when a big man is wide open because Rose has pulled in three defenders. Rose does not have great court vision. Not on the level of Nash or Paul. He excels at drive and kicks because of his ability to drive but Derrick needs more time to learn to get the easiest basket possible, the easiest two points during a certain possession. Either more time or he just doesn't have it. And if he doesn't, I'm not too worried. Derrick is better than Paul at this point in his career in other abilities, such as finishing in transition, finishing in the paint, or probably just in scoring. And remember Derrick is only in his third year, he's only 22. He has plenty of time to grow before he's even near his magical prime years.
On the other side, there's Charles Barkely ranting about how Derrick is the best point guard in the league and the ensuing cacophony of the masses. Journalist quote it. People read it. The mob reacts to it. This side is pretty simple. Their evaluations are much more emotional than practical. There's nothing wrong with it. Sports should arouse emotions and such. But making logical arguments is hard when running on adrenaline from watching D.Rose tear apart the Clippers, drain a three as time runs out on the Rockets, or whatever your favorite highlight may be. And Chicago fan's are emotional about their basketball because our brand, our legacy is built on the foundations of the greatest single basketball player to ever live the game. He dominated statistically, emotionally, whateverally. We've known nothing else but Michael Jordan basketball as good basketball. No other period have we been considered a true contender. And therein lies the rub. We need our superstar to be like Michael, because that's all we've known. And if our superstar isn't like Michael, great like Michael, then we can't be possibly considered contenders. And we need to be considered contenders. It's been too long. To Bulls fans, the MJ era wasn't a threepeat followed by a second threepeat. It was at best, an eightpeat or at worse, a sixpeat with some sort of odd drug addled period of two years which was lost to history. Then it was gone. And ten long years of cold, wintery hell ensued where Jalen Rose,Marcus Fizer, Eddy Curry/Tyson Chandler, and '06-'07 Ben Gordon took turns playing Lucifer. That's why we're so devoted and driven to the defense of Derrick Rose. Any conceivable slight, feigned or otherwise, towards D.Rose is an insult to our basketball enjoyment. We cannot stand it. We won't let you take it away from us. Not when we've got it suddenly back like this because of some goddang ping pong balls. Thus when someone in high regard (or any regard) like John Hollinger proffers his opinions and it does not bode well for Rose, we attack. And Bulls fans, make no mistake, we friggin' attack them.
Derrick is a great basketball player and a legitimate MVP candidate. Right now, no more, no less. Be thankful for that because he's only 22 friggin' years old. However, he is not the greatest anything yet. He hasn't proven it, career wise or playoff wise. He needs more time. So just sit back, relax, and enjoy the next 10-15 years. It's gonna be fun. I promise.