Game Thread #28: Low point of the season thread (i.e. at Charlotte)

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 28, 2005 12:02 AM CST in News Comment 17 comments

Having a disgruntled Christmas at BlogABull hasn't seemed to work any magic, as the Bulls losing streak has been extended to 5 games.

I'd say Wednesday night's game against the Bobcats would be a good chance to break the skid, but the Bulls are 1-1 against the 2nd year team and in all reality should be 0-2 if not for a miraculous comeback on opening night.

After reading comments here and here, morale is low among the Bulls faithful when watching these games. Granted this is a low point, but, come on: it's a long season. I would not get too hung up on the singular wins and losses. They're still an average team looking towards and average record and a low playoff seed.

But what I think is genuinely troubling (and I'm guessing this is for most of you as well) is the lack of progress from last year. Big guards/swingmen still kill them (and give a big hello to Gerald Wallace Wednesday night, you'll probably see a lot of him). Tyson Chandler has regressed. Ben Gordon is still inconsistent. Mike Sweetney has looked good at points but has not had a breakout year. They still foul too damned much. The dreaded 'players-only practice' has occurred.

But Chandler and Sweetney have played better recently. We know Ben can score, and hit big shots. Hinrich will eventually get his shot back. Luol Deng is starting his breakout season. Duhon and Nocioni are better shooters than last year.

I think it all hinges on Tyson Chandler. He was the most important part of the Bulls near-league-leading defense last year. With him off to a slow start (whether it was due to being out of shape or a medical condition, or both, or neither) the Bulls defense and effort level has failed them in several games. These are areas where Tyson excels, and as he showed in the Cavs game on Monday, he can score a little as well. I'm not talking about his overall career development: he still has no go-to move offensively. But he's not even the Tyson Chandler of last year who gave management reason for his contract extension this summer.

Do you really believe the loss of Eddy Curry and Antonio Davis would mean this much to their interior defense? Eddy wouldn't know help defense if it smacked him in the back of the head. And while AD put in some good years here, he'd only be a year older if he were still around. It's the poor play of Chandler that's submarined this year's defensive unit, and hopefully his slow start is behind him so the Bulls can get back to winning.

Then we can all gather 'round and figure out exactly what to do with Ben Gordon and the unsolved M2GwcDaS problem.

0 recs | Comment 17 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

it does hinge on chandler

last year, when our first defense broke down, it was chandler's ability to alter shots that gave us that second interior defensive edge.

also:

M2GwcDas = Deng? (Hinrich PG, Deng SG, Noc SF, Sweets PF, Chandelier C)

by CRG on Dec 28, 2005 12:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

I dunno...

It seems Deng is a step slow to be guarding the 2

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 28, 2005 12:14 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

unfortunately...

so is Ben.

by CRG on Dec 28, 2005 12:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

no way out

We're a 3.5 man team on offense and defense.

Mariotti is correct in that teams have learned the only way to beat us is to actually play hard and relentlessly attack the basket.

But I think most of us expected this team to hover around .500 for the whole season.

I don't see any team wanting to trade away their superstar, so Pax is forced to stick it out. Let's hope that Knicks lottery pick gives us a star.

Doldrum city!

by CRG on Dec 28, 2005 12:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Tyson is best when he's a help defender

While no one here would ever confuse Eddy or AD with Ben Wallace - the most important thing they did defensively was defend/check the larger of the opponents' two post players. This allowed Tyson to swoop in from the weak side to rebound and block shots.

This year, b/c we have an "Oompa Loompa" at PF, Tyson is burdened with the bigger player. Unfortunately, Tyson gets pinned underneath the hoop and his 138 lb frame can't handle it.

by Jobu on Dec 28, 2005 12:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

oompa loompa

Doesn't Sweetney fill this role most nights? He's large enough (alas, in the wrong direction)to put a body on the bigger centers out there.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 28, 2005 1:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

re: oopma loompa

Yes - Big Mike is physically wide enough to body up with opposing PFs, but I believe he's too overmatched against a 7 footer. I assume most of us have played hoops before. If you're in the post and the guy guarding you is 4" shorter, it's not that difficult to go over him. And this is coming from someone with close to zero basketball skills. Even though AD isn't that much taller than Big Mike, he appeared to be stronger, smarter, and a better defender.

Also, b/c Big Mike & Chandler basically race each other to 6 fouls most nights, he's only good for 23 min/game. Hopefully, both will get better at staying on the floor longer and develop a nice continuity together. this almost has to happen for the Bulls to get better.

by Jobu on Dec 28, 2005 1:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Agreed

From what I've seen from Chandler, he's much better coming from and 0ff-center position defensively. He just doesn't have the lower body strength to keep a true big man from backing down. And while sweetney has enough girth, I have yet to see the atheleticism to compensate for his heigth. The guy seems to score and rebound but I suspect that's has much more to do with basketball instincts. As Jobu put it, instincts and savvy don't do much when you're giving up 4 inches on the low block.

That being said, I'm not so quick to bash Chandler for his production. Has he regressed? yes. Is his production grossly short of his alloted cap space? yes. Could we do better for less money? not so sure.

I, personally, don't see many better (or realistic) options than Tyson on the market. It's clear ball doesn't come naturally to him (especially, offensively). Still though, he has heart and it's clear that his performance does matter to him. The way I see it, the next step down from Tyson is a Jerome James type player. Look at the other two big men that got similar contracts this summer (curry and dalembert) and ask yourself who you would rather have. I'd take Tyson in a heartbeat. Hell, throw in Dunleavy and it's clear that Tyson was one of the better signings. I'm not trying to rag anybody about cursing his deficiencies or that he makes more money than his performance calls for. I'm just saying that we could have done much, much worse. I think eventually he'll steady his production.

by CookDing on Dec 28, 2005 2:17 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Dalembert

The jury's still out on whether I'd take Dalembert over Chandler...

by bpa on Dec 28, 2005 4:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

This is brutal. . .

We can't hit a free throw, we're throwing the ball away, and we can barely get the ball past halfcourt. Which team is the second-year expansion team again?

by Big D on Dec 28, 2005 8:34 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

An interesting note in the game story

Bulls coach Scott Skiles said he thought about having little-used rookie Eddie Basden active for the game in his return to Charlotte, where he starred for the 49ers. "Until he missed the first bus and came on the second bus, then the thought was over," Skiles said.

Hilarious.

by Big D on Dec 28, 2005 10:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

daydreaming

I know I'm crazy, but if we throw gordon and picks at the raptors.....cris bosh anyone? They know that he's not going to re-sign there, no matter what his P.R. team throws out there this year. The only problem is that Mike James scores a lot, but god damnit I want Cris Bosh in a Bulls Uniform.

by dcarioca on Dec 28, 2005 10:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

not likely

unless we gave up both first round picks, gordon and maybe more, i'd doubt the raptors would give up bosh... even then, it would be a stretch. then again, babcock is their gm.

by CookDing on Dec 29, 2005 7:19 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bosh will stay in Toronto

He's a max player and would be giving up a ton of salary if he went to another team. I think its all paranoia on Toronto's end if they think they need to trade him.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 29, 2005 8:51 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Bosh doesn't have to stay

Yes - he'll give up that 6th year that only his current team will be able to offer him. HOWEVER, it's not uncommon for Nike/Reebok/Adidas/etc to increase a player's endorsement $$$ in a larger city to compensate a -and I use this word loosely- "smaller" paycheck. They always bring this up when they talk about Lebron leaving for NY/LA/Chicago.

Like most, I'd love to see him here but I think it's a little premature to definitively say what he will/won't do.

by Jobu on Dec 29, 2005 10:29 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs

Isn't Bosh a restricted FA anyways?

Toronto would be able to match any offer in two years. The only worry would be if he gets pissed off and starts dogging it like Vince Carter did.

by Big D on Dec 29, 2005 12:46 PM CST reply actions 0 recs

Free Agency

Bosh, like his fellow draft classmates Hinrich and Sweetney, are restricted free agents after the 2006/07 season. This is when the Bulls/Raptors have the right to match any offer the receive from other teams.

If they don't sign extensions, accept the teams' qualifying offer, and play through the 2007/08 season, they then become unrestricted free agents. They would then be free to sign with anyone they want.

by Jobu on Dec 29, 2005 1:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs