Bulls outscored 97-73 by Pacers after first quarter (and lose, obviously)

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 12, 2007 9:43 PM CST in News

I was taking some notes during that game, but they mysteriously get sparse in the 2nd half. Tough to pick on specifics when you're giving up 40 points in a quarter (73 in the second and third combined) to the Pacers.

And that's after a stellar first quarter for the Bulls, where soonafter they built up a 16 point lead in the first half.

Coincidentally (or not), the wheels fell off after the TyrusThomas-TroyMurphy scuffle, especially unfortunate considering Tyrus was having himself a nice night, with 4-6 shooting, 3 boards, no fouls or TOs in 9 minutes. He may get a suspension, but I don't know if the league truly defines 'punch' as the criteria for one, and if so, if they'd consider what Tyrus did a punch. I wouldn't be surprised either way on the ultimate decision.

Speaking of Tyrus, I'm not getting Skiles' stance of using only Noah or Tyrus in the rotation. For a few games it was Tyrus who was bumped, but it seems like Noah's now getting that treatment, and he was only in because Tyrus was ejected and it soon became lineup-boggle in the 2nd half. Kelly Dwyer mentioned today that Noah and Tyrus are never on the court together, and it's certainly strange. Instead we get Joe Smith (who had his 2nd straight nice game, 'predictable mediocrity' is served) starting, leaving for Tyrus, and then when Wallace comes out Smith's back in at center instead of Noah. Then the likely Skiles quote saying he shouldn't play Smith so much.

The Noah-aversion even got weird enough to where Aaron Gray came in for the final minute of the first half. He even chucked in a jump hook, likely causing many Bulls fans to subsequently change their underwear.

What makes such rotation decisions important is that there are going to be games like tonight where Ben Wallace is a corpse. He was lazy on defense (even failing to close out once because he was too busy whining to the ref...I almost could see 'Pistons' across his chest) and was not only missing shots (which I can handle), but making passes when he was wide open underneath the basket, which kills the entire offense. Just a complete waste.

Second game of a back-to-back, it's not that unexpected that Wallace would be so terrible. Skiles has to realize that and yank the guy when the signs are there. It didn't help that one of his other frontcourt options, Nocioni, was his usual roaming self on defense and managed no rebounds and 4TOs in 21 minutes. Noc is entitled to have a bad game, but man, it hurt, especially when Indiana spent most of the game bombing away and converting.

Meanwhile, Ben Gordon "carried over" his great game against Seattle through a whole quarter. Then he pretty much disappeared with 6 points the rest of the game. Like the rest of the team, in that first quarter the Bulls looked unstoppable. What occurred afterwards was the newest embarrassment of the season. That's why you shouldn't buy into 'momentum' between games. There's good games and bad, and so many bad games makes you a bad team.

They better beat the Knicks on Friday, and as a reminder: the day after that game is December 15th. Skiles shouldn't feel so damned safe either.

Tweet Comment 115 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I hope Tyrus doesn't get suspended.

Because I fear a suspension might mean a long exile to the end of the bench, even after the suspension is lifted.

Tyrus was just starting to establish some modicum of rhythm on the court.

"We goin' to the 'ship!" - LSU IS IN THE NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP!

by 1958ChiTown on Dec 12, 2007 9:56 PM CST reply actions

That's exactly my reaction

so I hope he doesn't. It wasn't really a punch...

by Jaina on Dec 12, 2007 10:40 PM CST up reply actions

hope?

who cares. What does he do anyway? he shoots 1-6 on dunks and layups. He is not a
1) an integral part of the team
or
2) essential to winning games.

by chicago-homesick-blues on Dec 13, 2007 10:32 AM CST up reply actions

4-6 last night

He's not integral cause Skiles hasn't given that opportunity. I'd just like the see the kid play.

by Jaina on Dec 13, 2007 11:43 AM CST up reply actions

seems

like when he was in they were winning...he got ejected, game over

by tyrus4prez on Dec 13, 2007 12:53 PM CST up reply actions

no crap

rhetly's a rhetard.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 1:00 PM CST up reply actions

According to the game flow

Tyrus was in towards the end of the big run that put the bulls up at the end of the first quarter. The bulls started to slide and lose the lead when BG and Luol were subbed back in in the middle of the second for Tyrus and Duhon. I think Tyrus getting ejected sort of pumped up the Pacers. If Tyrus could have figured out a way to just get the other guy ejected, I think the game would have been a lot closer.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 1:10 PM CST up reply actions

I dont really

think Tyrus should of been ejected...It was clear Murphy was pissed from the earlier tech and traveleing call. He should of gotten a tech but that's it....I'm also a little biased

by tyrus4prez on Dec 13, 2007 1:34 PM CST up reply actions

If Tyrus gets suspended it will be

another example of how Stern & Co. have no sense of overall justice and simply do what will get them off the hook with all the people who think the NBA is too "thuggish" or whatever.

by philosoball on Dec 12, 2007 10:32 PM CST reply actions

or another example

of the NBA not tolerating fighting, something every sports league should, uh, not tolerate. Lay off the Free Darko.

What a crappy game. Pax should consider canning Skiles by sundown on Thursday. I'm sure the Skiles clan will be over it by the 25th, and someone else will get a job under the holiday plant. Win-win.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 12, 2007 10:42 PM CST up reply actions

Not to slice it too thin, but this wasn't

a "fight". A couple pushes and the guys got tossed from the game. I think these college educated players got the message.

by philosoball on Dec 12, 2007 10:44 PM CST up reply actions

they never are "fights"

Shoving and slapping are pretty much the norm. What's your point? Thomas shouldn't get suspended because he wasn't fighting, and the rules against fighting are in place for reasons other than the obvious drawbacks of fighting? That's a little homerrific for my taste.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 12:24 AM CST up reply actions

"They are never fights"?

Tell that to Rudy T.

by philosoball on Dec 13, 2007 12:40 AM CST up reply actions

that wasn't much of a fight either

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 9:12 AM CST up reply actions

True, actually, players don't seem to land punches

anymore. With few exceptions (malice at the palace), it's either open-handed shoving, as with TT and whats-his-name last night, or else one-offs, like a flailing elbow well placed, a la Kobe on Manu (although with a nose like Manu's, could you ask for a better target?). It's so bad that a few years ago when Mourning and LJ "squared off" they ended up hitting nothing but air, looking like a couple of uncoordinated infants. Compared to that (or to Carmelo in MSG) TT vs. whats-his-name was actually kind of a better play-by-play shoving match.

Norm Van Lier's take on it was kind of interesting. He said that it was good for Tyrus to push back, to let the league know that he wasn't to be messed with; if he hadn't, then teams would start to target Tyrus as a guy whose head you could mess with. On the other hand, he now looks like a guy you can bait into taking a swing (even if open-handed).

By the way, where was the Bulls' "enforcer" Ben the Body Wallace during this fracas? Or this whole game for that matter? Not to say his age is showing, but he's crusty and creaking something awful.

Pathetic that the Bulls crawled into a shell like a shy little turtle at signs of actual conflict. Message to Bulls other than Tyrus: all of you get together and collectively grow a pair.

"Duhon, don't make that garbage-time jumper... Save it for the next game!"

by bullhockey on Dec 13, 2007 12:35 PM CST up reply actions

Norm is crazy.

and maybe Wallace remembers what happened last time he got involved with the Pacers.

We had this type of discussion last year during the 3rd or 4th Posey fiasco, and I remember it being a low point in this blog's history.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 12:40 PM CST up reply actions

In most contact sports, a little shoving

is to be expected occassionally. If no one throws a "punch", ie - closed fist, you would hope that just getting thrown out of the game would be sufficient to deter future incidents. is to be expected. If, as a league, you don't even allow a push back after a flagrant foul you better damn well punish the hell out of the instigator. In this case Tyrus was flagrantly fouled, then he simply got in Murphy's face and Murphy pushed him. Only then did Tyrus respond with a push. I would hope that in this type of case if Tyrus is given a one game suspension, then Murphy should get at least five for instigating.
In sports they usually say, the guy who responds is the one who gets caught. But in this case the league has the opportunity to punish the instigator which is really what they should do if they want to stop all the extra-curriculars.

by philosoball on Dec 13, 2007 12:55 PM CST up reply actions

I agree

the league does a poor job in giving consistent punishment to instigators. Instead they just look at what happened afterwards and then punish based on the severity of the aftermath.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 12:59 PM CST up reply actions

This business about the instigators

getting away with it while the players that retaliate get punished has always made sense to me. A retaliation is the first step in a potential out of control chain reaction...which is a much more seriouis problem than a single incident, no matter how violent or flagrent.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 14, 2007 1:21 PM CST up reply actions

really? (or: huh?)

If there's no incident then there's no potential for retaliation. The instigator shouldn't be punished in different degrees because of after-the-fact circumstances outside of his control.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2007 1:28 PM CST up reply actions

In team contact sports

there is a potential `incident' happening somewhere on the court or field or rink every minute. Somebody's getting pushed, punched, elbowed, kicked or tripped every play. Sometimes the ref catches it and calls a penalty. 99 times out of 100 it just gets stirred in and becomes part of the mix of the game.

By the same token, retaliation is also constantly occurring--tit for tat all game long. Sometimes (probably often) the retaliation isn't even linked to a play in the current game...or even season...or even pitting the particular players involved in the initial incident. Certainly, the model in hockey is that there are designated `retaliator/instigators,' goons that fight out the proxy battles for all the other players.

The NBA's a little different. Fighting is so frowned upon that goon-play has been forced, as it were, underground, into the interpretive world of courtside video and the commissioner's office. Every square inch of the court is covered by two or three camera angles. I have no doubt that the Bruce Bowens of the league spend hundreds of hours perfecting their `accidentally on purpose' trips, undercuts and flying elbows. Their actions must withstand the slow-motion replay scrutiny of game officials, and be adjudged to fall on the `accidental' side of the ledger.

To return to the incident in question, what would have happened if Tyrus had just gotten up and stuck his chin in Murphy's face, daring him to punch it? In my opinion, had Tyrus done that, he would have solidly and unequivocally won that confrontation. He would have shown both toughness and restraint. He would also have let Murphy--and every other coach and player in the league--know that he was smart and self-controlled enough not to get drawn into an emotional encounter.

Also, you can bet that for the rest of the game, maybe for the rest of the season, Murphy would be looking over his shoulder for when Tyrus would exact his retribution.

So, to clarify my initial post, what I'd say is that I'm all for retaliation in the moment getting more severely punished than the apparent instigation. I still say that the bigger issue is the escalation of the incident into an all-out brawl. That is what the NBA is seeking to avert at all costs.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 14, 2007 5:25 PM CST up reply actions

I pretty much agree that in contact sports

you will never eliminate all "dirty" plays. I would have been happy if neither party was suspended in this particular instance as I believed being thrown from the game was sufficient. That being said, I think Tyrus DID essentially do what you suggested (stick out his chin) and that's when Murphy escalated the confrontation again with a push. If Tyrus was assured that the league would have suspended Murphy at that point he may not have retaliated. But if Murphy was not punished and Thomas backed down he would have lost face (at least if he was Japanese ;-).
That's where the league can make clear that instigating , in this case Murphy's initial push, should be punished more harshly than Thomas' almost neccesary retaliation. It is simply not fair to Thomas that he was shoved to the ground, then pushed and finally given an equal punishment to the guy who clearly initiated the whole incident.
If the concern of a bench clearing brawl is so serious that currnet rules don't suffice, then the solution would seem to be punishing the root causes of melee's which are the "dirty" plays that go largely under-punished in the league, not the guys who feel they have to retaliate to save their dignity and their health since the league clearly won't protect them.

by philosoball on Dec 14, 2007 5:46 PM CST up reply actions

Actually I just saw that Tyrus was

the only one suspended. All I can say is, WTF?

by philosoball on Dec 14, 2007 6:13 PM CST up reply actions

I think, philo, that this

is how they have to do it.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 14, 2007 7:04 PM CST up reply actions

I don't think Tyrus was suspended

because he retaliated but only because he "hit" Murphy in the face which I guess means you have crossed some line.

by philosoball on Dec 14, 2007 7:10 PM CST up reply actions

The problem with your theory

is that it puts the burden of response in the hands of the "victim". In other words, when an instigator crosses the line with some kind of physical contact that exceeds the normal range he can wait to see if the "victim" responds physically in which case they will both be punished (probably equally), if the "victim" doesn't respond they are now considered a "punk" and the instigators act is minimized (there was no response).
That means overall a "thuggish" player (Posey) can continually go after the other teams players and either bait them into retaliating or otherwise make them look soft. When we see guys like Posey get away with this stuff it leads to the conclusion that the only way to stop it is by increasing the penalties for instigators.

by philosoball on Dec 14, 2007 2:50 PM CST up reply actions

Yes, it does put the burden in the hands of

the victim. However, I don't see that as a problem.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 14, 2007 4:16 PM CST up reply actions

Then you will have to accept a certain

level of instigation in the league with the resulting consequences.

by philosoball on Dec 14, 2007 4:43 PM CST up reply actions

Here is where

Ben was. Right in front of TT.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-071212bullsphotos,1,7814101.photo gallery?coll=cs-bulls-headlines&index=4

Please get this season turned around and play some great basketball.

by sue369 on Dec 13, 2007 7:59 PM CST up reply actions

Troy Murphy

Is a bitch.
Hes jealous that Tyrus was playing better than him.

youtube.com/angryasianace

by AngryAsianAce on Dec 13, 2007 8:11 PM CST up reply actions

Was this AFTER Murphy got punched in the nose?

Looks like it.

Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Dec 14, 2007 1:01 PM CST up reply actions

Yes. This picture is after the clinch

broke up. Ben did put himself between Thomas and Murphy. Nobody besides TT and Murphy got that excited though. It didn't look like there was any danger of a full-fledged melee breaking out.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 14, 2007 1:16 PM CST up reply actions

Skiles needs to go

before a trade is made where someone is sent out for a player more 'his type'.

There's hope Pax can pull off magic and get an actual upgrade, not just someone different to 'change things up'. If that's the only goal then the coach should go first.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 12, 2007 11:33 PM CST up reply actions

that's the doomsday scenario

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 9:58 AM CST up reply actions

ya know who I'm thinking about?

Corey Maggette. That guy is a nasty dude, gets to the line, and can score in bunches.

Contract-wise, he's likely to opt out, but so is Brand so I'm not sure they'd want to spend enough to keep them both anyway.

So if they're resigned to losing him, can they be content with expiring deals? Give 'em Duh and Veektor and the 'prospect' can be Sefolosha.

If they're not shy about the years (5 years!) on Nocioni's deal, him and Maggette are sortof redundant, so I'd try and start with him. Trade Machine won't activate until the 15th, so I'm not entirely sure how the BYC works unless I figure it out the old-fashioned way.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 1:17 PM CST up reply actions

he's so gosh darn fragile

and I fear future hometown discount talk, but he is a good player. 9.2 FTA/40 is tough to beat. I did the super basic math, and he averages 64.875 GP a season.

I have read Clipper fan complaints regarding his shot selection, and defense. He probably isn't a Skiles guy.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 1:58 PM CST up reply actions

we need some crappy shot selection

counteracts the posessions where nobody wants to shoot.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 2:17 PM CST up reply actions

yep

A low-percentage shot beats an offensive foul or passing the ball six times until it ends up getting stolen.

by Bayern Munich on Dec 13, 2007 2:37 PM CST up reply actions

I suppose

Although Nocioni generally solves that problem. Maggette would be worth overpaying for if he could stay healthy, and that's unlikely.

Since we're already in next year mode (does Ben Wallace qualify for the Finley/Houston buyout thingy?), notable players with an ETO are:
J.O.
Maggette
Brand
Artest
Marbury (ha!)
Arenas
Marion
Iverson

unrestricted:
Pietrus
Bonzi
Jamison

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 2:42 PM CST up reply actions

maybe a dumb question

But what's the difference between an ETO and a Player Option? Doesn't a "player option" mean the player has the option to ... terminate the contract ... early?

Man, I would love to see Jermaino on the Bulls.

by Bayern Munich on Dec 13, 2007 2:49 PM CST up reply actions

quoteth Sham

"Early termination option: Same principle as player option, but with some subtle differences that aren't particularly important, and definitely aren't interesting."

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 2:52 PM CST up reply actions

don't know if you're being facetious

but the 'houston' rule was one-time deal, and only effected the luxury tax, not the cap figure.

The Bulls are capped out with Deng and Gordon's 'cap hold' this offseason. They won't be players in the free-agent market, unless they trade with one of those guys being signed/traded.

I'm not even sure I'd want Maggette beyond this year (unless he was great). Unless the Bulls were able to pawn of Noc's contract, of course...or deal Deng in a huge sign/trade.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 3:01 PM CST up reply actions

I didn't understand the Houston Rule, thanks

I posted the ETO list specifically for trades this season. There's a handful of players on there teams will lose for nothing.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 3:07 PM CST up reply actions

wait ...

I understand the Houston rule, but as far as "holds" - does that mean a Restricted FA's putative/possible salary counts against the cap even before a team re-signs him?

In other words, the Bulls could end up with no room in Free Agency (because of a "hold" for Gordon) and then still lose Gordon to another team in free agency?

by Bayern Munich on Dec 13, 2007 3:27 PM CST up reply actions

well Gordon's restricted

so they're not losing him without a chance to match.

But for all free agents, unless the Bulls renounce the rights to that player, they get assigned a cap hold that's at least some raise (for restricted FAs it's the qualifying offer)

http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm#30

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 3:40 PM CST up reply actions

OK, thanks

So, the Bulls COULD (if they decided to go in an entirely different direction) renounce rights to Gordon and Deng, and let the Un-restricteds walk (Duhon, VK, etc.) and then get in on the Jermaino / Jamison bidding wars?

Not saying they will, but that's possible?

by Bayern Munich on Dec 13, 2007 3:48 PM CST up reply actions

and what wars they will be

sure.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 3:52 PM CST up reply actions

Cap holds

Gordon would be the one to trade. His cap hold would be $12.2M and Deng's would only be between $8-9. I ran the numbers and if they moved Gordon and Wallace for expiring deals, they'd end up something like $12-14M under the cap.

Not saying this is what they should or shouldn't do, but it'd seem to be an option if it leaves us with still a nice set of younger players and significant cap room.

Figuring out how to pull that off seems like a pretty significant problem in itself. There are only so many expiring contracts that could come back for Wallace in the first place, never mind the fact we'd probably have to throw something else in to get him.

by Sports2 on Dec 13, 2007 9:36 PM CST up reply actions

cap room

doesn't do the Bulls any good. Lebron James is a free agent after 2009-10, and no one would be happy with an organization in a holding pattern that long for a good free agent class. Plus Thomas and Noah will be up for extensions.

Gordon and Deng should do better in sign and trade scenarios than cap room too. It'd be a massive waste of value.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 9:51 PM CST up reply actions

There are free agents

other than Lebron. I think Jermaine O'Neal or Jamison would fit in very nicely in Chicago.

The problem isn't a lack of free agents, it's the fact that the Wallace contract is a millstone. I can't see anyone taking it on in exchange for an expiring contract, especially because that same expiring contract would be so valuable in some other trade with some other team.

Gordon is different, because he's still young and brings some good scoring to the table. I could see the Bulls trading him for an expiring deal to clear up cap space, but only if the season really falls into the tank. But who knows.

by Bayern Munich on Dec 14, 2007 8:53 AM CST up reply actions

Free agents vs. trades

Of course the big problem is if you're letting go of those guys, then there's no guarantee we get a good FA.

O'Neil makes about what Wallace + Gordon will make next year put together. I can't see the Bulls shelling out for him, and as long as we're talking about reality here (the Bulls minding the tax), I don't think a guy like him is an option.

On the other hand, a guy like Brand might be worth taking a shot at. He probably won't opt out of his deal coming off the Achilles injury, and you'd think their teams might at least consider taking Wallace + Gordon or some other young player rather than locking themselves into another 6 years of Brand that didnt reall get them anywhere.

by Sports2 on Dec 14, 2007 12:59 PM CST up reply actions

Bulls aren't going to be after free agents

especially with the high-level ones, as they'd only get moved with a sign/trade, since the player gets more money and the team with that player can get something for him.

Also, Jermaine O'Neal isn't going to opt-out.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 14, 2007 1:09 PM CST up reply actions

Under this regime,

coming to the Bulls is a little like going to play for Jerry Sloan in Utah. In other words, for better or worse, there's a very defined culture under Paxson and Skiles.

I just don't believe that Jermaine O'Neal fits.

There's no question he has talent, but he's become something of a headcase over the past few years, and his games missed-vs.-games played is spotty at best.

I don't think the Bulls would want a guy like that, and even if they did, he would not want to play for a Bulls with a culture of gym rats who try hard day in and day out.

"Duhon, don't make that garbage-time jumper... Save it for the next game!"

by bullhockey on Dec 14, 2007 4:42 PM CST up reply actions

in related news

Clips released Ruben Patterson.

Not that I want him on the team, but pointing out that the clips now have an extra roster spot.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 3:42 PM CST up reply actions

A dual use waiving

I like the Clippers explanation. It wasn't even worth it to guarantee his contract even though they signed him in the offseason knowing that Brand and Livingston would be out for most of the season.

Clips are working with a short roster already. I could learn to like Corey Maggette in a Bulls uni.

by NBA Observer on Dec 14, 2007 10:42 AM CST up reply actions

Mattt...you busted on Gordon

but where is all the blame for Deng being soft as a pillow tonight and Hinbrick being a no-show? Oh well..."The core" is on its last legs with this team.

by GoldenThreePeat on Dec 12, 2007 10:47 PM CST reply actions

One guy at a time

Two weeks ago it was Tyrus, last week it was Hinrich. Next week it will be Deng. Right now it's BG, mostly because he teases us with big games every 5th game or so. Don't worry, if he gets 35 against the Knicks, we'll move on.

Seriously though, BG 6-11 in the first quarter. That's something to be excited about. Hell, that's a good game for Kirk. But 1-10 the rest of the way. That's unacceptable. The bulls still managed to get 102, which is surprising.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 12, 2007 10:54 PM CST up reply actions

Err

Ill agree with deng being a no show, and gordon just ducking out early, but hinrich was there, when he wasnt on the bench

he played 28:02
was 4-6 from the field
was 0-1 from 3 point range
was 3-3 from free throw line
had only 1 rebound though
8 dimes
4 personal fouls (which sat him out half the 3rd)
1
steal
and a big ol ZERO turnovers
thats 11 and 8 assists, sure its not an amazing stat line, but its far better than deng or gordon.

I believe only tyrus and Smith had a better stat line.

I had two knocks on hinrich the whole game, the 4th foul, and not taking more shots especially in the 4th.

im trying hard to become the next kirk hinrich, therefore im doing nothing more than being the next chris duhon.

by piccolomair on Dec 13, 2007 2:22 AM CST up reply actions

Orlando got blown out by the Bucks.

I guess there not any good either.

by philosoball on Dec 12, 2007 10:50 PM CST reply actions

I'm sorry Matt...

I know its easy for me to criticize when they loose but I don't think you give enough shit to "the core" of this team when they loose. They need to be held accountable for this 7-13 start.

by GoldenThreePeat on Dec 12, 2007 10:53 PM CST reply actions

How many times

are you going to say the same thing?

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 12, 2007 10:55 PM CST up reply actions

Seeing how difficult it is

for the Bulls to score when Gordon is off just goes to further prove that we have to trade him for someone who is more consistent. The Bulls need someone they can count on every night. Deng is close , be he's never been a "prolific scorer". A baller that can just turn it on at any moment. Deng kind of goes with the flow of the game and takes what the other team is giving.

Gordon can be explosive, but until he gets his shot back, the Bulls will struggle to win along with him.

by RogersPark Kris on Dec 12, 2007 11:07 PM CST reply actions

BG vs other scorers

The only difference between BG and the elite scorers in the NBA is that they somehow get to the line. There arent really that many consistent players out there except maybe tim duncan and a couple of others ones. Arenas, carter, all those people have plenty of nights where they go 7-20. But they also go to the line and get another 8-10 points on free throws.

by Sambossanova on Dec 12, 2007 11:19 PM CST up reply actions

Other scorers

You must be talking about Glen Davis. He was 3-6 from the field, 10-10 from the line, had 9 rebounds in 20 some minutes.

by hlac on Dec 12, 2007 11:28 PM CST up reply actions

you're worse

than Sam Smith...so please elaborate. Who is this "more consistent" player that the Bulls can trade Gordon for?

As a side note, I DO agree with your point that when Gordon is off, it seems like the scoring just goes right out the window and the rest of the team struggles...but that still doesn't excuse you from naming this imaginary "more consistent" player.

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 8:12 AM CST up reply actions

I'm working on this

but it's going to take some time. But last year, Deng was a much more consistent scorer than BG.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 9:14 AM CST up reply actions

It wouldn't be that hard

to find a shooting guard who isn't less then 6'4 and can average more then 19 ppg. I would way that Gordon is about the 20th best shooting guard in the league.

by RogersPark Kris on Dec 13, 2007 9:30 AM CST up reply actions

heh

now you're resorting to just pulling numbers out of the air and making up things...plus you still haven't named anyone

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 10:23 AM CST up reply actions

Joe Johnson, Michael Redd,

Kevin Martin, Brandon Roy, Vince Carter, hell even Stephen Jackson...would all be an upgrade.

by RogersPark Kris on Dec 13, 2007 10:34 AM CST up reply actions

your point was

that the Bulls should TRADE for one of these guys...so you think those teams will just do a straight trade for BG?

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 11:27 AM CST up reply actions

When does any team do a straight up trade

for 1/1 at the same position? Never. You have to create a package deal.

by RogersPark Kris on Dec 13, 2007 11:30 AM CST up reply actions

last year

Stephen Jackson and Al Harrington for Mike Dunleavy and Troy Murphy.

Not exactly the same, but it was two starters for two starters.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 11:35 AM CST up reply actions

Not exactly the same thing

Although the trade did include two starters from each team, it was a bit more complex. In the eight-player deal, the Pacers received from the Warriors Mike Dunleavy, Troy Murphy, Ike Diogu and Keith McLeod in exchange for Al Harrington, Josh Powell, Stephen Jackson and Sarunas Jasikevicius.

"It is not he same to talk of bulls as to be in the bullring." ~Spanish Proverb"

by VivaLosToros on Dec 13, 2007 2:24 PM CST up reply actions

teams have to match salaries

There isn't a "package deal" rule. You can make sure wacky ideas work.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 11:38 AM CST up reply actions

lol

YOU'RE the one who said it in the first place!! I was simply re-stating what you originally said. LOL...hilarious...you back up your argument by making it MY argument, that's a new one, even for this place...

it's pretty much useless going any further with you...

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 1:27 PM CST up reply actions

Can we ask for stops

If the Bulls struggle shooting the ball, can we still ask them to make some stops on defense? They gave up 117 points. They typically give up about 95 points.

We know they will struggle shooting the ball some nights. Every team struggles from the field eventually. But the defense shouldn't break down like it did last night.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 9:46 AM CST up reply actions

Doesn't fighting show passion?

I would think slapping a guy in the face would take TT out of Skiles doghouse. After all, Skiles seems to be one of those old school guys who believes that physically attacking opponents shows your passion and commitment to the team. I have no evidence of that, other than the story of him and Shaq getting into it during practice. So, maybe Noah should bitch slap Wallace during practice and he and TT can be on the court together.

by snley on Dec 13, 2007 8:00 AM CST reply actions

Same thought I had.

That's FIRE. That's PASSION! That's SCRAPPINESS MAX!!!!!!!!

Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2007 9:57 AM CST up reply actions

Wallace was garbage

I noticed the same play that you described, when he allowed a score because he was too busy whining to the ref.

I'm sooooo sick of his little 1-handed, underhand layups I don't know what to do. He's scared to make contact because he's scared to go to the line, because he knows that he probably won't make the shots. Because he tried to avoid the contact, that's what causes him to miss most of those shots.

You could just tell from the opening tip last night that he didn't have it. My patience is wearing thin with BB.

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 8:21 AM CST reply actions

What I saw

I was only casually watching this game at the bar in the 2nd half. I just kept looking up at the TV and seeing the Pacers hit yet another wide open teammate beyond the arc and bury it.

When I left my house we were up 16. By the time I got to the bar the Pacers were up 53-52. I was dumbfounded. I said to myself, "Like the Nets game last year where we launched 18-0 and lost by 10".

The play by play review makes the 2nd half sound even worse. Indiana shot 59% from beyond the arc in the 2nd half making 10 of 17 attempts.

When you give up 22 more points than you typically give up you're going to lose the game.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 8:53 AM CST reply actions

I don't know how true this is,

perhaps someone here knows...but it's my impression that NBA players, when they're just shooting unguarded threes--in practice, for example--nearly all of them hit an extremely high percentage.

I remember reading Givony's reports last year, where he was invited to several of the draft eligibles' work-outs. He reported the percentage made from various spots on the floor, and it seemed like the players hardly ever missed.

I've also seen the (I think it was on youtube) vid of DeShawn Stevenson challenging Arenas to an after-practice best of 100 three point shooting contest. Arenas (I'm pretty sure) hit over 80, and Stevenson (not a noted three-point specialist) was right behind him.

The point I'm trying to make is this. The fact that Indiana hit 59% on their second half threes does not mean they suddenly got hot. It means they were left unguarded.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 10:04 AM CST up reply actions

yes

I mentioned the wide open shots in my second sentence. Since I posted that, I have watched all the highlight footage. A lot of the wide open shots were the result of gawful defensive rotation.

Bulls can't shoot? We know. Get some damn stops already. Skiles throwing in the towel never helps address this problem. He looks like a lost puppy putting in the end of the bench with 8 minutes remaining in games. "I'm searching for a solution." says Skiles.

The Sonics win is nullified by this piss poor performance.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 10:14 AM CST up reply actions

Wanna be more impressed?

Arenas did it one-handed.

Let us prepare for glory! --Michael Redd

by tyger1147 on Dec 13, 2007 11:07 AM CST up reply actions

Right!

I'd forgotten that. Do you know how to find that clip? I think I picked it up off some basketball blog. It was really outrageous. As it got close to the 100th shot, they even started harassing each other, and the shots just kept on falling.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 11:15 AM CST up reply actions

here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bn6O42a5vl8

by ScottieCartwright on Dec 13, 2007 11:23 AM CST up reply actions

Thanks.

One of the things I like so much about this clip is that it shows how impossibly talented NBA players really are. That, and it's a great inside look--these guys look like they're having so much fun. Who wouldn't trade the life they have now for life playing on an NBA team? And Arenas comes across as incredibly charismatic. It might have been after seeing this clip that he became my undisputed favorite player in the league.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 11:49 AM CST up reply actions

why I hate that video

Because the Wiz and other teams have so much inside footage online of their practices, goofing around as teammates, and other hoopla.

Chicago? We have almost nothing. We have no fan insider at the Berto Center.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 12:39 PM CST up reply actions

That was just awful

I followed the 1st Q on the radio, and watched most of the 3rd and early 4th. That 3rd quarter was just awful. Missed layups, forcing shots up too early, leaving opponents wide open. It seemed every time the Bulls hit a few shots, they gave up uncontested drives and 3-point shots.

From the Bulls peak at 38-22 in the 2nd, they were outscored 95-64 over 2 1/2 quarters. That's unacceptable. This was a game they needed to win, and they didn't. It doesn't matter if you can beat Detroit if you can't win games you're supposed to win.

We're at the quarter pole for the season with a 0.350 record. That's 7 wins, projecting to 21 or 22 over the 82 games. Even ignoring the 2-8 start, they are 0.500 over their last 10 games. That projects to a 38-44 record. There is little evidence of consistency or sustained improvement to suggest this will change anytime soon.

I feel like I'm talking about the Bears, but there is no consistency from game to game in all phases of the game. Unless they find that and get it together within the next 15-20 games, this is a hugely disappointing and vastly underachieving lottery team.

Wrecked 'em? Damn near killed 'em!

by mdmnd9294 on Dec 13, 2007 9:47 AM CST reply actions

last night in the NBA

The Magic lost by 14 to the Bucks.
Dallas lost by 12 to the Raptors.
Knicks lost to the Sonics at MSG.
The Celtics only scored 90 against Sacramento.

A strange night all around the association.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 10:11 AM CST up reply actions

It sure was. It happens.

That's the biggest problem with the AWFUL start to the Bulls' season - it makes pretty much every loss a huge loss.

Ordinarily, every team (except for maybe the best 2 or 3 in the league) will have a few losses like this. Pacers - usually not a great shooting team - shot 57%, Tyrus was ejected, some tough calls, and it all snowballs until they end up losing big. I'm not saying we should be satisfied with the effort (especially on D), but what happened last night pops up occassionally to all but the best teams.

The problem is, after a 2-8 start, they NEED to win pretty much every game against non-contender teams. You can't have one of those "man, we should have beaten those guys" games, but then shrug it off and go get the next one. Pretty much every game that's not against the league's 6 or 8 contending teams, the Bulls have to start winning.

by Bayern Munich on Dec 13, 2007 1:43 PM CST up reply actions

Actually

it projects to 28 wins.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 10:23 AM CST up reply actions

If I'm not mistaken,

I think what md is saying is that if from this point forward the Bulls play 500 ball, they'll finish at 38-44. In other words (though I don't honestly know how many different ways there are to say this), if they're 6 under right now, and they lose one for every one they win for the rest of the season, they'll still be 6 under when the season ends. That's higher math for ya.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 10:44 AM CST up reply actions

You are not

and I wasn't addressing that statement. What I was addressing was:

We're at the quarter pole for the season with a 0.350 record. That's 7 wins, projecting to 21 or 22 over the 82 games.

It's what I like to call "barstool math."

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 10:52 AM CST up reply actions

hollinger math

The Exp. W% is .306.

Officially a hater on Ballhype!

by hscs on Dec 13, 2007 10:55 AM CST up reply actions

Yeah, I saw that.

He doesn't give much hope to Bulls fans. I can't fathom that after their last years the Bulls would be back in the lottery and the Bears would be vying for one of the top picks in the draft.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 11:02 AM CST up reply actions

well, when I read that

I admit I did a double-take. I just assumed he left out the word, "more."

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 10:59 AM CST up reply actions

D'oh!!

That's the last time I rely on my Homer Simpson calculator!

Nice catch BS. 21 or 22 more wins, for 28-29 wins total. That's what I get for trying to work and comment at the same time.

Now, where is that :embarrassed: smiley...

Wrecked 'em? Damn near killed 'em!

by mdmnd9294 on Dec 13, 2007 2:19 PM CST up reply actions

jeez...that's the last time

(until the next time) that I give anybody the benefit of the doubt. I guess you were right after all, bs.

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 2:57 PM CST up reply actions

General rule of thumb

Never assume somebody meant something but forgot to write it around here, especially when it comes to numbers.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Dec 13, 2007 4:14 PM CST up reply actions

Dec 15

Oh how it looms

by Option27 on Dec 13, 2007 10:04 AM CST reply actions

change of subject

the speculation/leaks on the Mitchell report are insane. This will be very interesting.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 10:47 AM CST reply actions

SANCTUARY!

Please, I'm trying to avoid that tabloidesque crap. It's just an excuse for columnists to get on their moral high horses again. Let this blog remain a sanctuary!

by snley on Dec 13, 2007 11:59 AM CST up reply actions

i happen to enjoy the tabloid element

but yes, alec, it's way off-topic, and there are plenty of other places where you can go to discuss.

Speaking of off-topic, I don't get the constant 'isn't this like other chicago teams?' element. A lot of people here aren't from chicago, don't like other sports, let alone like chicago teams from another sport. Plus it's a useless comparison in the first place.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 12:38 PM CST up reply actions

fine. fine.

Ita est, ergo ita sit.

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 1:00 PM CST up reply actions

This team is driving me crazy!

I thought they were playing well, then the fight and then we are down by 20. What happened?

I thought Tyrus was dumb to retaliate. I think we were up by 4 and Murphy would have gotten a technical. We could have been up by 5 with the ball. That could have be felt as Indiana losing its cool and while we care about winning the game. I thought Indiana was energized by Tyrus foolishness.

You cannot blame that loss on the fight. I agree with many of the above posts. But Wallace seems to irk me more than any of the other poor performances. Wallace's lack of intensity and his passing when he is wide open for a layup take the wind out of us. BG cannot have big nights every game. We seem to lack the defensive intensity we had last year. This is where TT is so helpful. His blocks and steals can lead to easy fast brake points.

I will be crazied if they don't beat the Knicks tomorrow.

by chgobr on Dec 13, 2007 1:00 PM CST reply actions

They scored 117 points

Stops, stops, stops.

I don't know how much more "if Wallace could only score" posts I can handle. We were a defensive team in 04-05. Ditto 05-06. Last year, yet another defensive team.

We know Ben Wallace's offense stinks. It stunk last year. It stunk in Detroit. Lets target the mistakes made by our players where they are supposed to execute.

I too wish Tyrus had just stood tall to Murphy and let him throw the punch, but even with Tyrus in the 2nd half, he's not fast enough, nor smart enough to rotate over and get a hand up in the 15 wide open three point attempts the Pacers had in the 2nd half.

by NBA Observer on Dec 13, 2007 1:42 PM CST up reply actions

there's different degrees of stank.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Dec 13, 2007 1:48 PM CST up reply actions

different potencies

Ita est, ita sit. ("It is what it is." c1650--Arnold Geulincx)

by alec on Dec 13, 2007 2:01 PM CST up reply actions

The more I watch basketball, the more I come

to the conclusion that the difference between winning and losing is not as great as we think. How can Washinton, Philadelphia, Atlanta, Charlotte all have better records than we have? I don't know if we could we have regained the momentum last night if Tyrus doesn't retaliate. The point is it is the small things that can make a big difference in the NBA. A block or a steal at critical points and the whole game changes. Would our rotations have been so bad in the second half if we didn't lose something before half-time?

Shooting percentage on jump shots is difficult to control. We can control our energy on defense. Forcing turnovers is a good place to start. That may energize us and pick up the rest of our game.

by chgobr on Dec 13, 2007 3:24 PM CST up reply actions

Sweet subject line!

Pervert.

by CrashDavis on Dec 14, 2007 11:01 AM CST up reply actions

You know, it's kind of funny

I've missed the whole darn week - no electricity since Sunday morning if anyone wants to feel bad for me - and it's like I didn't miss anything at all.

And it's amazing how repetitive some of the comments sound when you read 300+ of them over several posts in a single sitting. :)

Still, having missed both games, I think I would have willingly sat through the Pacers one just to be able to watch the Sonics game.

"I believe. I believe. It's silly, but I believe." (Miracle on 34th Street)

by wjb1492 on Dec 13, 2007 9:36 PM CST reply actions

Ice storm victim?

Reading all those posts is amazing. And there are only a few things one can say about a team playing below it's abilities. And a coach coaching below his abilities.

by KT on Dec 14, 2007 8:14 AM CST up reply actions

There really isn't anything

new to say. And Matt has covered almost everything worth saying. The team is starting to improve. I noticed Deng is turning middle and attacking the basket now when he posts instead of trying to prove he can hit fadeaway jumpshots from the post. Gordon and Hinrich are also showing signs of returning to form. The core and whatever's left of Ben Wallace is still enough to make the playoffs in the East. But, this team is going no where in the playoffs unless Thomas, Noah, and Sefolosha are playing and playing well, especially Thomas.

by Scotter on Dec 14, 2007 9:03 AM CST up reply actions