If you take the best player off every team . . .

[coldfish]

Where do the Bulls rank? Assume that every other player is healthy.

For example:
- Miami without Lebron
- OKC without Durant
- SA without Duncan
- NY without Carmello

I think Chicago is up there. OKC would still be dam good. Same with SA. Indiana is pretty good without Granger. On the other hand, I think this Miami team would be in trouble without Lebron.

[panthermark]

Where do the Bulls rank? Assume that every other player is healthy.

For example:
- Miami without Lebron
- OKC without Durant
- SA without Duncan
- NY without Carmello

I think Chicago is up there. OKC would still be dam good. Same with SA. Indiana is pretty good without Granger. On the other hand, I think this Miami team would be in trouble without Lebron.

Is Granger the best player on that team? Or is it George?

Memphis is another one...who is the best player? Z-Bo?

[johnnyvann840]

We're easily the best team in the league. That is being proven right now. Replace George with Granger and I think Indy gets worse.

[coldfish]

Where do the Bulls rank? Assume that every other player is healthy.

For example:
- Miami without Lebron
- OKC without Durant
- SA without Duncan
- NY without Carmello

I think Chicago is up there. OKC would still be dam good. Same with SA. Indiana is pretty good without Granger. On the other hand, I think this Miami team would be in trouble without Lebron.

Is Granger the best player on that team? Or is it George?

Memphis is another one...who is the best player? Z-Bo?

Fair points but it kind of doesn't matter for this analysis. If you think George is their best player, take George off Indiana and rank them. If you think Memphis has two top players who are equal in value, take one off and rank them.

I'm just curious about where people think Rose's "supporting cast" ranks and I suspect that this topic is going to get interesting when people are faced with admitting Rose has one of the best, if not the best, supporting cast in the NBA.

[jstnw89]

Not the best

[Michael Jackson]

Where do the Bulls rank? Assume that every other player is healthy.

For example:
- Miami without Lebron
- OKC without Durant
- SA without Duncan
- NY without Carmello

I think Chicago is up there. OKC would still be dam good. Same with SA. Indiana is pretty good without Granger. On the other hand, I think this Miami team would be in trouble without Lebron.

Is Granger the best player on that team? Or is it George?

Memphis is another one...who is the best player? Z-Bo?

Fair points but it kind of doesn't matter for this analysis. If you think George is their best player, take George off Indiana and rank them. If you think Memphis has two top players who are equal in value, take one off and rank them.

I'm just curious about where people think Rose's "supporting cast" ranks and I suspect that this topic is going to get interesting when people are faced with admitting Rose has one of the best, if not the best, supporting cast in the NBA.

The FO is cheap. Our bench sucks long live Korver.

[Ralphb07]

Nice thread Fish. People seem to underrate his supporting cast and did it big time this offseason. The Bulls have done a really nice job.

[NZB2323]

I think that you'd have to rank Marc Gasol ahead of Z-bo this year, considering that Marc is in the running for DPOTY and the Grizzlies are a great defensive team and an average offensive team.

But the best team without their best player is easily the Clippers. Not because Chris Paul isn't an MVP type player, but because Eric Bledsoe might be an all-star if he was a starter. His PER(which isn't an end-all-be all measure for judging players) has been 19.16 this year. That puts him at 39th in the NBA, just ahead of Marc Gasol and Zach Randolph. The league average for PER every season is 15.

[Carl25]

Third behind LAC and OKC.

[BuffaloBull]

Where do the Bulls rank? Assume that every other player is healthy.

For example:
- Miami without Lebron
- OKC without Durant
- SA without Duncan
- NY without Carmello

I think Chicago is up there. OKC would still be dam good. Same with SA. Indiana is pretty good without Granger. On the other hand, I think this Miami team would be in trouble without Lebron.

Is Granger the best player on that team? Or is it George?

Memphis is another one...who is the best player? Z-Bo?

Fair points but it kind of doesn't matter for this analysis. If you think George is their best player, take George off Indiana and rank them. If you think Memphis has two top players who are equal in value, take one off and rank them.

I'm just curious about where people think Rose's "supporting cast" ranks and I suspect that this topic is going to get interesting when people are faced with admitting Rose has one of the best, if not the best, supporting cast in the NBA.

If you include Thibs in that supporting cast then yeah, Rose has a lot here. It's easy to say the Bulls need a clearcut #2 and all that (and it's not wrong to think so, you always want more talent at the top) but really, we put up a big fight with Miami in the ECF and that was without a transcendent performance from Rose. And cruddy offense from a whole bunch of guys.

The team is different now, and Rose is older, and has suffered some real setbacks, so we won't know anything until playoffs unfold. But he's had his time in the dark and will hopefully come out all the stronger for it. Failure forges strength if you learn from it.

This is a pretty good crew though. Booz, Taj, and Noah make for a tough frontcourt, Deng and Jimmy are strong on the wings. They clearly lack an offensive catalyst and iso player with Rose not here, but he's one of the best in the league at both of those things. And Thibs has everyone believing they can win no matter what.

[jumpmanjay]

Third behind LAC and OKC.

yeah, thats what i think, too. hard to say with OKC, though as we have never really seen them without KD before.

[BULLHITTER]

idk; it's rare for me, but i've been very un-invested in this team due to its transient nature. that stated, the "bench" has exceeded my expectations somewhat, but, and it's a BIG but, imo the credit goes to the coaching staff and using a system that plays to the roster's makeup/strengths.

i'm not overly impressed with the talent; the bulls love gritty defensive guys. rebounding and defense will win a whole lot of games as a fundamental precept. but at the end of the day i think thibs is such a fundamentally sound coach, he'd probably make a competitive team out of the charlotte bobcats.

deng, boozer and noah aren't scrubs; putting third tier talent with those 3, imo, the success they've had thus far speaks to the coaching. adding rose in a singular "superstar" model gives them a puncher's chance.

[johnnyvann840]

Third behind LAC and OKC.

yeah, thats what i think, too. hard to say with OKC, though as we have never really seen them without KD before.

I totally forgot about the Clippers. Now they would be interesting. I still think we're a little better than a Clipper team without CP3. OKC without Durant is not on our level.

But I retract my "easily the best" comment as LAC and even MEM would be interesting. But Memphis without ZBo would lose the big advantage they have over most teams. Take Gay off Memphis and I don't think they change much. In fact, that happened and they made their best playoff run in team history and played the best I've seen them play.

[johnnyvann840]

idk; it's rare for me, but i've been very un-invested in this team due to its transient nature. that stated, the "bench" has exceeded my expectations somewhat, but, and it's a BIG but, imo the credit goes to the coaching staff and using a system that plays to the roster's makeup/strengths.

i'm not overly impressed with the talent; the bulls love gritty defensive guys. rebounding and defense will win a whole lot of games as a fundamental precept. but at the end of the day i think thibs is such a fundamentally sound coach, he'd probably make a competitive team out of the charlotte bobcats.

deng, boozer and noah aren't scrubs; putting third tier talent with those 3, imo, the success they've had thus far speaks to the coaching. adding rose in a singular "superstar" model gives them a puncher's chance.

Transient nature? Rose, Deng, Boozer and Noah have been together now as long as any core in the league and have been at the pinnacle reaching the league's "final four" only to get hurt last year when they had a REAL chance, IMO. And I think we have more than a "punchers chance" this year.. After listening to Stacey King on Waddle and Silvy the other day talking about wathcing Rose practice and run and cut and dunk and knocking down shots that he "cannot even tell he was ever hurt"... and Jimmy saying Derrick looks "better than ever" to him. I'm even more encouraged.

Get on board the train, man. We're going to "Jordan".

here's that Stacey King interview at around the 40 min mark just after Eddie O.

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/chicago/play?id=8869724

Here's just Jimmy's part

http://espn.go.com/espnradio/chicago/play?id=8869542

[coldfish]

I think they are clearly top 5. I ranked them 3rd. That's pretty dam impressive and a complete 180 degrees from the narrative that Rose's supporting cast sucks. People focus on the lack of secondary creator and that's correct, but the team has awesome coaching, rebounding, defense, chemistry, etc. To discount all of that in light of a secondary shot creator is pretty ridiculous.

Now comes the controversial part. With a supporting cast this good, Rose can win a title if he plays like a top 3 player. With Wade and apparently Howard falling off, I think Rose really could be #3 in the NBA if he has an Adrian Petersen type recovery.

1. Lebron
2. Durant
3. Rose

If Rose can't return to being a top level player, the Bulls are pretty much screwed. The team would need to add a player better than Rose to be a contender and given the salary constraints, that is going to be impossible.