Blog a Bull: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:

Around SBN: Want to help build SB Nation? We're hiring! Bar-right-arrows

Not even sure it could be called a venting thread

Blogabull_s_tiny by your friendly BullsBlogger on in News

I mean, a home loss to the Knicks. Getting outscored  28-12 in the 4th quarter against a team that can't play defense and in most cases simply doesn't find it necessary. You could call it stunning, but the Bulls haven't been playing well lately despite their record, and when you let teams hang around like this, it can happen.

I wasn't happy with Boylan's caving into the Knicks' small-ball by countering with the tiny-ball lineup for too long. But tough to complain too much when Tyrus got plenty of time (ok I will complain, why have him at the three the entire game?), and they were better with him on the court (+6), especially in a first half stint paired with Noah and Gray. But it was balanced with several mistakes, including some poor shot selection and a couple no-chance goaltend tries. Overall though, more Tyrus minutes means good things [Edit: For those who (wisely? heh) avoid the comments section, I'm not saying Tyrus had a good game, just that his time tonight was no indication that he shouldn't be playing], and I credit Boylan for using the quick hook with Nocioni, whose flu game was just like Michael Jordan's, except the complete opposite. Felt the same with his use of Aaron Gray, the hook came at just the right time to keep him effective (if he insists on playing him in the first place).

Down the stretch, Joe Smith was carved up by Zach Randolph,  Gordon completely dissapeared, and the team in general was missing plenty of close shots. Again, this Knicks team cannot guard anybody, and when you do miss there's usually an offensive rebound waiting in your lap. To only score twelve points in a quarter is a team-wide collapse.

In this era of good feelings the Bulls squeaked out wins against crap teams, and it was worrisome. But the reports were that the players were feeling better, and I suppose a lot of fans did too. Maybe now this is another reality check that they're not out of the woods yet, and the Boylan plan of benching Gordon and giving heavy minutes to Wallace (38 tonight) and Smith (34) wasn't really 'working' at all.

Whether anything will work is another question.

0 recs | Comment 215 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

I thought
you only used raw plus/minus to pick on Nocioni.  I guess we can add to praise the inconsistent Tyrus Thomas to the mix.

by JSlakov on Jan 8, 2008 11:13 PM CST   0 recs

well they go hand in hand
because Noc always has a shitty +/-, and Tyrus always has a good one.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:15 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

well then
what about Duhon's consistently good plus/minus

by JSlakov on Jan 8, 2008 11:15 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

yeah but nobody thinks Duhon is good
He didn't have one last year, or the year before that.

So chalk it up to Hinrich's shit start.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:22 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

how about
Ben Gordon having the worst plus/minus on the team?

If Duhon has the best and Ben Gordon has the worst then I guess you should agree with Duhon starting over him?

by JSlakov on Jan 8, 2008 11:23 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

Is everything in this 30-game vaccum?
These guys have track records, you know.

(not the same track record Ben Wallace has)

I don't get the hullabaloo over quoting +/-. I don't use it as an end-all and never pretend to. So why the need to try and pin me down with some counter-argument using it?

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:26 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

because
I've seen you scoff at plus/minus when it favors Nocioni or Duhon.  All I ask is that you be consistent.  I personally think its a stupid stat.

As for Thomas, he has a track record too, of being inconsistent, and he's proven it in pretty much every game he's played this year.  I want him to play as much as you do, but not necessarily to start and not necessarily heavy minutes.  And I don't think playing him is the answer to all our problems.  And I definitely don't think there's any point to constantly comparing him to Nocioni when I happen to think they should be playing together much more often instead of thinking of Nocioni as stealing Thomas' "well earned" minutes.

by JSlakov on Jan 8, 2008 11:31 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

it's not a stupid stat
I suppose game-to-game it is, and without factoring teammates it is.

But that's my point: Tyrus' "track record" is one of having a positive plus/minus over the course of an entire season, which is a more useful piece of evidence then a label of  'inconsistency'.

I think that Noc is absolutely blocking Thomas' minutes. Maybe I don't need to use plus/minus to bash Noc, but there's a disconnect in most circles of Noc's effectiveness. Although I'd say in this space we're all pretty aware that he's not very good, so maybe I can retire it. But I won't because it's fun for me, and Tyrus still needs love in the face of those who love all that is chucky and roamy and monster playoff games against Antoine Walker-y.

I never said it's the answer to all the problems. But it's one answer that's easier to implement than a trade.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:42 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

track record
Tyrus Thomas has a negative plus minus for his career.  Games this season count just as much as last season on a per game basis.

by JSlakov on Jan 8, 2008 11:52 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

well, now you're just making stuff up.
Or not. I'm looking at net (on court - off court) per 100 posessions. That's the one labled in green and green means go.

Thomas is  +1.3 this season, +3.6 last season

http://www.82games.com/0708/07CHI11D.HTM
http://www.82games.com/0607/06CHI10D.HTM

Again, I use it in particular with Noc and Thomas because I think Noc doesn't get enough flak for the non-box-scored deficiencies in his game.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 12:06 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

and sorry that this needs to be pointed out
but when I explicitly say that we only use +/- to bash Noc and praise Tyrus...that's meant to be facetious, and admitting there's some bias involved in me using it.

I used it in this game's recap because Tyrus had a bad game but I wanted to point out that it wasn't THAT bad.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 12:13 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

the point
I know you're being facetious but the point is that you continue to hail Thomas in every post even when he's not that great.  Then, there have been games that Nocioni completely carried us in and you give him a back handed compliment.  And because they're such different players, you can't honestly say that Thomas would have done a better job if he had Nocioni's minutes because he's not capable of doing the things that Nocioni has done at times.

The overall point is that we need Nocioni and Thomas both to play well to be a great team and both of them have shown they are capable of this.  However, neither of them are going to carry the team and if either of them is doing anything but their role on the team its a problem.  So I don't like Nocioni jacking up contested threes, even though at times it seems to work better than our usual offense, but neither do I want Thomas running the break or trying to post up.  And the truth is, both of these guys would look a lot better if we had some real talent instead of the ugly amalgam of overhyped jumpshooters that we do.

by JSlakov on Jan 9, 2008 12:23 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

but Noc is an overhyped jumpshooter
And because they're so different (like you say) I think Tyrus could help the team more with Noc's minutes. Just speculation, but that's what I think.

Right now Noc is at 25.5 MPG, and Tyrus at 16.8, and that doesn't factor in the DNPs

As far as what they can and can't do, at least when Tyrus 'can't' post up, when he does it can be viewed with a purpose of shaping his game in the future. Do you really think that Noc and Tyrus are equals when looking at the big picture?

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 12:30 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

big picture
I wince when I think of the big picture knowing that this team is fucked unless they can pull of a good trade.  The fact that they tricked me into thinking this team was anything close to a contender makes it even worse.  I think we're both just mad and you choose to take it out on Nocioni and Duhon and I choose to spread the blame out more evenly.

As for Tyrus posting up, I don't really envision him ever being a post up guy but more of a shooter/dunker, Marion with more hops at best.  At this point I wouldn't mind seeing Nocioni traded to a good team so A.) we can get something good for him and B.) I'd like to see him succeed because I really do think he's a good player who would be very valuable to the right team

by JSlakov on Jan 9, 2008 1:13 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

that said
I appreciate those with Noc-love to keep me in check. f'real. Because I admit further bias against Nocioni because I hate watching his style of play, and that's not exactly fair.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 12:32 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Finally!!!
Your blog, but man, has the Noc bashing gotten old.  Especially, in light of a team that needs to be bashed in general.  Be a little more versatile.  Move to another player, like say, Hinrich.  Whose inability to now even consider shooting, on a team that can't score, is crushing.  Then move on to...

by EdNealy on Jan 9, 2008 10:21 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

actually
it sounds like he does watch the games because anyone who watches the games knows that the whole team is playing terribly.

by JSlakov on Jan 10, 2008 1:01 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

anybody who watches the games
knows they played fine until the last 4 minutes of that NY game.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 10, 2008 8:59 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

playing fine
playing fine is not good enough.  We should be blowing out the Knicks, not letting them hang around and definitely not letting them come back tow in

by JSlakov on Jan 10, 2008 4:35 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

wrong
the reason the knicks lose is because they don't play together, not because they don't have talent or other teams are so much better than they are.  If the knicks play the right way, they are ever bit as good as any other team in the league and can beat any other team in the league.  They played together in the 4th quarter.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 10, 2008 9:08 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

well
thats not the stat you were referencing in the original post.

by JSlakov on Jan 9, 2008 12:13 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Tyrus's +/- is actually better than that this year
He's at 3.4 per 100 poss according to basketballvalue, which is dedicated just to +- per poss.  82games offers more information, but for +- I prefer basketball value.
http://basketballvalue.com/teamplayers.php?year=2007-2008&mode=summary&sortnumber=21&sor torder=DESC&team=CHI

by Scotter on Jan 9, 2008 9:06 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

well
Matt referenced the stat +/- that can now be found on NBA.com in the box score and in that stat Thomas is -22 on the year or -16 if it wasnt counting last night's game yet.

by JSlakov on Jan 9, 2008 4:19 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

That's simply semantics.
I know Matt would agree that pace adjusted +- like the numbers Matt linked to at 82games and I linked to at basketballvalue are better than what's in the NBA boxscores.  The NBA boxscore +- is only good for talking about individual games.  Tyrus has a significant track record of being better than the guys playing ahead of him on the roster.  He has a positive +/- for this year and his career.

by Scotter on Jan 9, 2008 4:39 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

ok
then he should have used that stat in the original post instead of the raw plus minus which he's mocked in the past.  I don't think that stat really says anything about individual games  either because a player can play terribly and the team can still gain points if there are other players making up for it and vice versa.

by JSlakov on Jan 9, 2008 7:36 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

Whoa.
Don't argue based on the supposedly self-evident merits of consistency.  In a post-modern world, there is no special virtue in consistency.  Yes, you may want your players to hit their free throws consistently, but in terms of arguments, lifestyles, belief systems, viewpoints...consistency is not merely over-rated, it is non-existent.  

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 12:05 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

well after filtering out the alec-ness
that's a good point. A lot of times asking for consistency is asking the player to be simply better, which is rarely possible.

Like, if only Duhon could consistently hit his shot.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 12:09 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

It's not non-existent...
it's lack is just given a free pass by everyone

by Sports2 on Jan 9, 2008 6:28 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Well....no.
If you actually want to learn about it, there are a lot of good entry level articles on the internet about post-modern psychology.  Post-modernism stems from the same roots as most other 20th c advances in math, physics, logic, etc.  Demanding consistency is like demanding the universe operate according to Newton's laws.  We now know it doesn't.   Get out of the middle ages.  

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 8:49 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

wow
alec, you have finally enriched my life.  your existence is no longer futile.  congrats on taking a big step.  can i get a link to some of those articles.  thanks.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 9, 2008 9:08 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

If you're actually interested...
which I honestly can't tell (but I think you're not) I can link you.  I do have a (what I think is a) really interesting article from the L.A. Times archived....

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 9:25 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

very interesting article
but I would tend to agree with Sports, there is a difference between the consistency with which TT views himself as primarily in a catch-and-shoot jumpshooter and/or a slasher/primary ballhandler and the consistency with which he makes his FT's.  But it is interesting to speculate whether or not Wallace views himself as a late game offensive option or not in addition to be a tough on-the-ball defender.  And how much of that identity is determined by the guys they are playing with.  It would seem to me that if Kirk doesn't think you are an "offensively capable guy" he's not going to pass you the ball much or in good positions to prove that.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 9, 2008 10:14 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

LOL
True advances in science are the result of demanding consistency.  Discarding Newtonian physics for quantum mechanics is precisely because the new theories are more consistent with observed phenomena.

Taken as some kind of whole, I wouldn't say "post-modernist" thought makes much sense as a concept. It doesn't stem from the same roots as true advances, it's largely a reaction to them from the emotional lot of folks who can't or won't think scientifically and therefore don't want anyone else to. A half-assed reincarnation of the Romantic reaction to the Enlightenment. :)

by Sports2 on Jan 9, 2008 9:45 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

My how this has taken a turn!
I think if we keep this up a lot more folks even than usual will start to get pissed off.  So I'll only add this one more bit then drop it.  But it was nice to chat....  

The mathematical foundations of post modernism really come out of Gödel's Incompleteness Theorem, which, in a nutshell, demonstrated that completeness and consistency are mutually exclusive.  That was almost 100 years ago, and it remains the mathematical innovation we're still attempting to come to grips with, in both hard and soft science as well as the arts.  

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 10:35 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

All I'm saying, Matt,
is you feel free to be as inconsistant as you like...even to the point of being on both sides of the same issue--because the you that makes the case today is not the same you that made the case yesterday.

And I said I'm done.

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 10:48 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

I was being serious
I didn't mean you couldn't have this conversation in any thread, whatever it was (didn't read most of it)

And if you wanted to explore the studio space some more, you could make an 'alec's corner' diary.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 10:52 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

OK, To bring it back to the Bulls...
... they can (and must) remain consistent because they cannot be complete. :)

Put differently, The Bulls are not an "end state", they are a collective effort toward a goal. But reaching the goal wouldn't make them "complete, it'd change the goal".  In a sense they're all consistency and no completeness (Like the solution to a math problem, the Bulls must be consistent in following the rules that lead to championships.

I don't know if there's a hard and fast set of rules, but I do think there are consistent things that lead to winning.  I used to think the Bulls had a plan and a pretty good handle on that.  Not just the "Xs and Os", but what type of players work, what kind of systems work with what kind of players, how to get folks to work well together.  What kinds of trades and signings work and what kind don't.  What it costs to win and how much players in general and there own in particular, can and can't do.

Now, I just don't know.  Do they have a consistent vision?  Maybe they do and they've just executed it poorly.  Or maybe they don't have much of a plan and they're just winging it.  I really

OK, I'll stop now :)
Since Matt doesn't want it here, can I suggest my Religion/Politics/Philosophy board?

by Sports2 on Jan 9, 2008 11:10 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

C'mon Matt
Tyrus might have been +20 in the first half, but he was +6 for the game, so what does that tell you about the second half?  He played like crap.  Sure it was bouncy and energetic, but he didn't accomplish anything and actually got stuffed by Curry.

And if you are wondering why he didn't get time at the 4 in the same breath as pointing out Smith didn't handle Randolph well at the end, do you really think Tyrus was the answer?  Really?  Randolph would have abused Tyrus.  If Deng wasn't out and Noc wasn't under the weather, Tyrus wouldn't have played this game, and it's debatable whether or not Thabo wouldn't have been the better choice to pick up the extra minutes at the 3 anyway.

Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 8, 2008 11:15 PM CST   0 recs

He got stuffed by Curry twice, actually
it was no good.

I thought Tyrus was fine in his first stint in the second half, but he was part of the sinkhole to end the game, and he did play his part in that.

If Randolph had to guard Thomas, it's possible Randolph would've fouled out. I don't get why it's always one-way when talking about 'matchups'

I fear that you're correct that if Deng wasn't out and Nocioni wasn't awful (sick, my bad) that Tyrus wouldn't play. That's saaaaaad.

In conclusion, Tyrus Thomas still rules.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:19 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

(btw, I'm not saying Tyrus had a good game)
just that his time tonight was no indication that he shouldn't be playing in general. Often.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:23 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

to a point
I agree, but the whole "TT is the savior" thing needs to ratchet down a notch.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 8, 2008 11:38 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

savior to what end?
I'm not arguing the ends here, I think Thomas and Noah have simply earned heavy minutes, and that opinion coupled with seeing our old-men frontcourt play for as much as they do gives ample reason to change in that direction.

Besides TT may not be a savior but he's more of a hope of one than a Joe Smith 18-footer or earth-moving Wallace defense.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 8, 2008 11:47 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

So, we're righting off
this season and going back to the never ending youth movement?  Honestly, I too want heavy minutes for Noah, Thomas and Sefalosha and if it means missing the ever-popular 7-8 seed, so be it.

by EdNealy on Jan 9, 2008 10:25 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

Unfortunately
I think this debate is going on in unproductive terms.  I think, but can't prove:
  • "Heavy" minutes aren't necessary.  These guys do need game experience, but for every game they probably spend twice as much time in practice.  That's where the majority of NBA players learn and grow (if a practice is useful).
  • "Steady" minutes are necessary.  I think what'd help, more than playing these guys a ton, is playing them a little bit, but steady.  I think to do that, however, someone else needs to be moved out of the frontcourt. Wallace, Smith and Nocioni eat up too many minutes to play three young guys steadily.  At the moment, I'd use Gray situationally and still get a consistent 12-20 minutes for Thomas and Noah.  Finding the right lineups is tough because neither of those guys is a good fit next to Wallace.
  • From what I've seen, we'll have a hell of a time making the playoffs with our young big guys playing huge minutes, or if someone gets hurt. Still, I think Pax will go all out for the playoffs. I don't think he wants to go to the Chairman at the end of the year with that to show.  And I don't suspect the Chairman wants to miss out on those revenues.
  • As far as how it'd be viewed, I won't view sneaking into the playoffs, especially on the backs of the rapidly aging bigs we've got, as a very productive season.  I mean, Skiles was fired to get this season back on track and implicity the idea was that the problem was largely him and not the players. Well, if the goal is just getting into the playoffs, expectations have fallen a lot with or without Skiles.
  • I hope the Bulls are looking hard at moving Nocioni and especially Wallace.  I'd be trying to find a future pick for Duhon while I'm at it. In the case of Wallace, I expect him to fall apart playing the minutes he's playing. If he's not being showcased, I'm not gonna be happy.

by Sports2 on Jan 10, 2008 8:12 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Tyrus
The coaches should give him an opptunitity to succeed.  Having him on the court in crunch time as a three with the offense running through Big Ben and everyone in the building knowing little Ben is taking the shots in the last 5 minutes is just dumb by the coaching staff.  

by Jesse07 on Jan 9, 2008 9:28 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Plus
the last 5 minutes is what made the huge jump from a + 20 to a + 6

by Jesse07 on Jan 9, 2008 9:29 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

right, I didn't pull that +/- out of thin air
when watching the game, it was notable that the team's lead got bigger when Tyrus was on the court, and then shrank when he left it.

Thus I was very happy to see Tyrus come in during those final 5 minutes, but he didn't play well and nobody scored.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 9:48 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

there's a difference between
passing the ball to Wallace on offense, and running the offense through him.  Why do people think they are running the offense through Wallace?  They aren't.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 9, 2008 9:30 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

they do on some posessions
one is one too many.

You don't agree that putting Tyrus at the 3 is a bad idea? He had to stand in the baseline corner most of his time out there.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 9:49 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Tyrus does not look ready to play the 3!
Facing the basket from 25 feet out usually ends up in a turnover or bad shot.

Leave him at the 4 where he can exploit his quick leaping abilities over the slower and heavier PF's. His post game was just starting to come around, plus he forces the opposite team's 4 to jump out on him and not leave him open for the 15-17 foot jump shot (which he has definitely improved on this year!).

by RogersPark Kris on Jan 9, 2008 9:55 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

He's got to be a 3 against a team like the knicks
and the offense is more evolved than the 3 just stands in the corner.  Deng posts up all the time so TT could do the same at the 3.  He isn't just standing in the corner.  And Matt, if he is your wonderboy, he should be able to impact the game positively from the 3 or the 4.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 9, 2008 10:17 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

well technically he did
And I really don't see the concern with 'matching-up' with the Knicks.

by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jan 9, 2008 10:25 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

the bulls need to match up with everybody
because none of their guys is consistently a problem for the opponent.  You know this already.
Nocioni-Khryapa in '08

by bullshooter on Jan 9, 2008 10:30 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Time to give up on the season
If this team can't beat the Knicks at home, then they fuckin' suck.  Try to make a trade, and play the young players in the meantime and see what you have.  Why bother playing Wallace and Smith big minutes?  So the team can get swept in the first round by the Celtics or Pistons?  Smith had a damn good game tonight, and Wallace had a typical 2008 Ben Wallace game, and the team still lost at home to the Knicks.  That's the upside you get with those guys, so what happens when they get hurt or have lousy games?  I understand why Boylan thinks he can rack up wins by playing the vets, but I have no idea why Paxson would allow it.

by Big D on Jan 8, 2008 11:25 PM CST   0 recs

We're really a different team without Deng ...
Deng goes out in the 2nd half and we lose in OT to the Blazers, we barely beat a Kings team without Bibby, Martin, Artest at home, then we fall apart and lose to the Knicks at home.

It seems like without our best player (if it wasn't clear before, it's 100% clear now that Deng is by far our best player) we can't beat teams we're supposed to beat and we don't have a chance to be competitive against the better teams.

It just pisses me off that we should have a 7 game winning streak now but instead we lose two OT heartbreakers and that piece of shit game last night.

by Orange Juice on Jan 9, 2008 3:22 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

it was more than
Deng's absence...they got nothing from the 3 spot as a whole

Deng - out

Noce - 7 pts

TT - 2 pts

Thabo - 0 pts

ADrain - DNP

If they could've gotten around 15-17 from ANY combination of those guys they get a win last night

by ScottieCartwright on Jan 9, 2008 3:32 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

Thabo barely counts
He played less than 3 min.  And Noc really hurt us - a guy as sick as he looked out there shouldn't have been out there for 15 min.  He was 3-12.

by Jaina on Jan 9, 2008 5:24 PM CST to parent up   0 recs

Really remarkable that
Khryapa didn't get a look at all given the utter lack of productivity at the 3.
"Duhon, don't make that garbage-time jumper... Save it for the next game!"

by bullhockey on Jan 10, 2008 10:07 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Before the season started I was really hoping
Deng would get big minutes at the 2, thereby opening time at the 3 for Tyrus.  What we've actually seen happen is that Deng's game near the basket has improved, which has rendered the plan to move him further away somewhat moot.  As for Tyrus, it seems that every inch further from the basket he gets, his play drops off a foot.  

Plus, I don't think it can be disputed that Joe Smith has been by far and away the best player since the coaching change.  The team would probably mutiny if his PF minutes were parceled out to Thomas.

This team is in a hard place right now.

by alec on Jan 8, 2008 11:26 PM CST   0 recs

Deng at the 2?
Seriously? You thought he could play the 2 in the East?

by Khalid El-Amin on Jan 9, 2008 1:25 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

Deng at the 2 was coming full bore
out of the Bulls' preseason hype machine...Deng posting smaller 2 guards.  That's all we heard until his bad back put him--and the plan--on ice.

by alec on Jan 9, 2008 8:36 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

It doesn't matter if the Bulls have
the matchup against small guards if they don't take advantage of it.  (see Tyrus & Starburry last night)

by Jesse07 on Jan 9, 2008 9:34 AM CST to parent up   0 recs

We need trades
And I don't care that our players at the lowest
price level.Wasn't point of firing Skiles play the
youngsters more?
And Boylan played them.Noah,Gray,TT,Sefolosha...did very well in second Q.That was actually one brught spot of the game.Then all of a suden they got benched.
I was replying to Jaina why he did this and I think he just scared of Wallace.He's afraid that
"veterans" will tune him out like with Skiles.
He is thinking about his career not about teams' future.
"RUN,TYRUS,RUN!!!"-Formerly Chicago Bulls coach S.Skiles

by Azabullsfan on Jan 8, 2008 11:27 PM CST   0 recs

You can't blame a guy for thinking
about his future, but I keeping going back to that yahoo article Matt dug up about what Boylan should really be doing:  developing the kids.  

That's actually the best career move for him, because if he does it right, everyone who counts (read: who might be in a position to hire him) will notice.

by alec on Jan 8, 2008 11:32 PM CST to parent up