Better (short term) future: Bulls or Knicks?

Don Draper · Post #1 » by **Don Draper** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:14 am

Which has the better future for the next 2-3 years? I leaning towards the Knicks (mainly because of Boozer's contract)

ikkoikki · Post #2 » by **ikkoikki** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:17 am

3-4 years? its pretty much impossible to predict that long into the future.

Boozer gets way too much hate, dudes a 20+ PER player on average.

Knicks need to fire D'Antoni

Don Draper · Post #3 » by **Don Draper** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:19 am

2-3 years then. Basically who do you think has the better foundation going forward (factoring in the current roster, salaries, draft picks, etc)?

ikkoikki · Post #4 » by **ikkoikki** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:27 am

I really think both teams futures are very bright. But I hate D'antoni and his system so the players for the knicks are there but I don't think it's the right coach.

Melo and Amare are a good foundation to build around, but chauncey is old and I don't know how much more he's got left.

The Bulls on the other hand are more of a complete product. They got the players at every position theyre at least 2 deep, all they need is a starting SG. They got the young promising coach, they got a good front office.

I don't think I'm being a homer here when I want to pick the Bulls, they're just much closer right now.

nitric0 · Post #5 » by **nitric0** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:46 am

The team that won 62 games with a new coach, players and system.

panthermark · Post #6 » by **panthermark** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:48 am

Hate to be a homer...but...Bulls.

Chicago is one agreed upon CBA from completing the roster. NY has plenty of room and cap space to grow....but needs to figure out if they are going after a max 3rd player, or will go after a center and some role players.

Two realisic acquisitions for Chicago are JR Smith for the MLE, and Anthony Parker for the vet min or LLE....along with some vet min 3rd string PG that won't ever dress and Kurt Thomas (or another big) re-signing.

Rose/Watson/vet min PG
Smith/Brewer/Parker (knowing Thibs, he would proably start Parker and make Smith a 6th man)
Deng/Korver/Butler
Boozer/Gibson
Noah/Asik/Thomas or another vet min 5th big.

Bulls are very close to a title...and have some assets in the bank for the future.

ikkoikki · Post #7 » by **ikkoikki** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:51 am

thats right, don't forget the bulls have the bobcats 2016 pick and Nikola Mirotic stowed away in europe, who happens to be beasting right now. Those two assets can be used or parlayed into a trade package for someone really good.

knicksosmoove · Post #8 » by **knicksosmoove** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 5:54 am

I think the Bulls will be the better regular season team, but the edge in talent might have to go to the Knicks. The Bulls have one reliable, elite scorer in Rose and then Deng and Boozer who are not elite and cannot create for themselves very well. They need to add someone this summer who can at least create for himself (JR Smith). The Knicks have two elite, reliable scorers in Carmelo and Amar'e and then Billups who is reliable and can create for himself and Toney Douglas who is not reliable but can create for himself. The Bulls have better depth and better size.

I think they'll be close in the next few years. They're both a notch below the Heat, but they should be the leaders among the rest of the East.

Post #9 » by **alucryts** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:07 am

knicksosmoove wrote:I think the Bulls will be the better regular season team, but the edge in talent might have to go to the Knicks. The Bulls have one reliable, elite scorer in Rose and then Deng and Boozer who are not elite and cannot create for themselves very well. They need to add someone this summer who can at least create for himself (JR Smith). The Knicks have two elite, reliable scorers in Carmelo and Amar'e and then Billups who is reliable and can create for himself and Toney Douglas who is not reliable but can create for himself. The Bulls have better depth and better size.

I think they'll be close in the next few years. They're both a notch below the Heat, but they should be the leaders among the rest of the East.

If you take out Rose, the Bulls vast majority of talent lies on defense. The Bulls defensive talent very far out-weighs the advantage the Knicks have overall on offense (Rose included). It's the combination of Rose on offense, our vast defensive talent, and the future assets we have going for us right now that put the Bulls comfortably ahead of the Knicks for the foreseeable future. The way I look at this is the Bulls are an offensive oriented, create your own offense shooting guard away from being counted among the favorites whereas the Knicks have yet to prove they can play any hint of solid, consistent defense.

knicksosmoove · Post #10 » by **knicksosmoove** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:28 am

I don't know about defensive "talent." They have a good defensive coach, but they don't exactly have Dwight Howard roaming the paint or Lebron James closing out on wings. Noah and Deng are very good defenders for their positions, but they're not going to single-handedly shut down elite scorers.

The problem I saw was that the Bulls' defense was not good enough to take care of Lebron, Wade, Bosh, and the Heat's shooters all at once. Their defense is all based on over-loading the strong side. It'd good, and if a team doesn't have much offensive talent or is unwilling to gameplan against it, it's extremely effective, but the problem is that usually someone on the weak side is open.

Mike D'Antoni's MO when we faced the Bulls the first two times in the regular season was to use the Felton-Amar'e pick and roll as a diversion (and indeed, Amar'e did not put up good numbers those two games) and then instead have Felton swing the ball over to the perimeter and then the weak side where the shooters were wide open. A lot of people said the reason the Knicks won the first two games was that they had fluke shooting nights, but you're going to shoot the ball well if you're consistently getting open looks. Any version of the Knicks going forward should have enough shooting talent to make that work.

XtotheDeezy · Post #11 » by **XtotheDeezy** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:46 am

The Bulls have the better short term and long term future right now. The New York failure in the post-season can be blamed on Amare's injuries as well as not having Melo for the whole season, but even the other pieces need to be examined. Billups, as another user stated, will still be productive but doesn't give them an edge when it comes to the short term compared to the Bulls. Rose and Noah will only get better, while Amare/Melo are pretty much in their prime right now.

I'm willing to go so far as to say that the Bulls will finish with a higher record than the Knicks and will progress further in the playoffs for the next three seasons.

boyz2knicks · Post #12 » by **boyz2knicks** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:55 am

LOL at bulls having the better future. no team is winning with a score first pg. as skip bayless said, knicks has higher chance than the bulls. if we can get that defensive center, well be good. and LOL at thibs being better. offensive coaches are better than defensive coaches. i rather have those dantonis suns than this bulls. those suns has still a chance to improve defensively if they get a defensive center and a assistant defensive coach but this bulls team has no chance to improve even if they get a shooting guard and an offensive coach.

your shooting guard sucks not because he sucked but because he doesnt have enough touches due to rose chucking 30 attempts and shooting 35%. defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill. if you give 100% effort every game, your team will be injury riddled and will be the cause for the regression. unlike offensive teams which seems to be winning without giving any effort. thats why boston needed to coast because they cant win through offense and is afraid that injuries might happen again to their players. youll be the same with rockets or skiles team who will regress next season due to injuries and fatigue to your players because of too much playing defense.

SmooveAndMelo · Post #13 » by **SmooveAndMelo** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 6:56 am

Knicks

XtotheDeezy · Post #14 » by **XtotheDeezy** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:07 am

boyz2knicks wrote:LOL at bulls having the better future. no team is winning with a score first pg. as skip bayless said, knicks has higher chance than the bulls. if we can get that defensive center, well be good. and LOL at thibs being better. offensive coaches are better than defensive coaches. i rather have those dantonis suns than this bulls. those suns has still a chance to improve defensively if they get a defensive center and a assistant defensive coach but this bulls team has no chance to improve even if they get a shooting guard and an offensive coach.

your shooting guard sucks not because he sucked but because he doesnt have enough touches due to rose chucking 30 attempts and shooting 35%. defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill. if you give 100% effort every game, your team will be injury riddled and will be the cause for the regression. unlike offensive teams which seems to be winning without giving any effort. thats why boston needed to coast because they cant win through offense and is afraid that injuries might happen again to their players. youll be the same with rockets or skiles team who will regress next season due to injuries and fatigue to your players because of too much playing defense.

I guess I'll have first honors in breaking down your 'analysis' and say this. If the Bulls get a shooting guard that can shoot, then Rose won't need to carry the offensive load by himself. His scoring will go down, but his % will increase no doubt. That right there is improvement as the points will still be coming, just from another source, however the points will come with better efficiency.

Oh wait I guess that's your entire analysis.

RaisingArizona · Post #15 » by **RaisingArizona** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:10 am

Easily the Bulls.

shoevarek · Post #16 » by **shoevarek** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:26 am

boyz2knicks wrote:defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill.

I love that kind of logic. Go ahead and apply for a job with Knicks. Tell them that for 1 million you are going to give 200% effort every night. By your logic that would make you DPOY. If that will sound convincing to them let us know.

boyz2knicks · Post #17 » by **boyz2knicks** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:35 am

XtotheDeezy wrote:
boyz2knicks wrote:LOL at bulls having the better future. no team is winning with a score first pg. as skip bayless said, knicks has higher chance than the bulls. if we can get that defensive center, well be good. and LOL at thibs being better. offensive coaches are better than defensive coaches. i rather have those dantonis suns than this bulls. those suns has still a chance to improve defensively if they get a defensive center and a assistant defensive coach but this bulls team has no chance to improve even if they get a shooting guard and an offensive coach.

your shooting guard sucks not because he sucked but because he doesnt have enough touches due to rose chucking 30 attempts and shooting 35%. defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill. if you give 100% effort every game, your team will be injury riddled and will be the cause for the regression. unlike offensive teams which seems to be winning without giving any effort. thats why boston needed to coast because they cant win through offense and is afraid that injuries might happen again to their players. youll be the same with rockets or skiles team who will regress next season due to injuries and fatigue to your players because of too much playing defense.

I guess I'll have first honors in breaking down your 'analysis' and say this. If the Bulls get a shooting guard that can shoot, then Rose won't need to carry the offensive load by himself. His scoring will go down, but his % will increase no doubt. That right there is improvement as the points will still be coming, just from another source, however the points will come with better efficiency.

Oh wait I guess that's your entire analysis.

actually rose didnt need to carry it but because he wants to score than to pass, then dont expect rose will just defer to whoever your shooting guard is. he didnt even defer to boozer who is a big man who has a 60% TS before joining bulls, so why the hell you expect him to defer on a less efficient shooting guard. thats why the bulls didnt drafted brooks and didnt pursue melo coz they want rose to be happy. you better trade rose coz he is your downfall kid. hes the next AI and i believe bulls will be the same with those sixers who overachieves in one season by going to the finals and sucked for the rest of the years.

boyz2knicks · Post #18 » by **boyz2knicks** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 7:43 am

shoevarek wrote:
boyz2knicks wrote:defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill.

I love that kind of logic. Go ahead and apply for a job with Knicks. Tell them that for 1 million you are going to give 200% effort every night. By your logic that would make you DPOY. If that will sound convincing to them let us know.

actually you can find defensive players in 2nd round or free agency. or players who are considered bust focuses on becoming defensive centers coz they would be out of the league if they dont play defense. if they are really so rare, then shane battier or tony allen should be paid max contracts.

bullsnewdynasty · Post #19 » by **bullsnewdynasty** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 8:25 am

knicksosmoove wrote:I don't know about defensive "talent." They have a good defensive coach, but they don't exactly have Dwight Howard roaming the paint or Lebron James closing out on wings. Noah and Deng are very good defenders for their positions, but they're not going to single-handedly shut down elite scorers.

Wing defenders:
-Keith Bogans
-Ronnie Brewer
-Luol Deng

Post defenders:
-Kurt Thomas
-Omer Asik
-Joakim Noah
-Taj Gibson

I really don't think you can possibly find more defensive talent on any team in the league. All of these guys are proven to be upper echelon defenders at the NBA level by essentially anyone that follows the game.

Mike D'Antoni's MO when we faced the Bulls the first two times in the regular season was to use the Felton-Amar'e pick and roll as a diversion (and indeed, Amar'e did not put up good numbers those two games) and then instead have Felton swing the ball over to the perimeter and then the weak side where the shooters were wide open. A lot of people said the reason the Knicks won the first two games was that they had fluke shooting nights, but you're going to shoot the ball well if you're consistently getting open looks. Any version of the Knicks going forward should have enough shooting talent to make that work.

Don't know why we're talking about random regular season games, especially given the fact that the Knicks' entire roster is essentially different now from those 2 games. And by the way, 16-24 is a once in a season type of game from 3 point land. In no way should it represent how things would work over a larger sample of games.

boyz2knicks wrote:no team is winning with a score first pg.

Last time I checked, Chauncey Billups and Tony Parker still had rings.

if we can get that defensive center, well be good.

Don't know where you're going to find the cash to do that, given you all want to keep your CP3 pipe dreams.

LOL at thibs being better. offensive coaches are better than defensive coaches. i rather have those dantonis suns than this bulls. those suns has still a chance to improve defensively if they get a defensive center and a assistant defensive coach but this bulls team has no chance to improve even if they get a shooting guard and an offensive coach.

You might be the only person in the world that thinks D'Antoni is a better coach than Thibs. Dan Tony ball will never win championships, period.

I find it funny that you think it's so easy to get a defensive center. It must be why half of the league is looking for one of them. And :lol:

at anyone that thinks a "assistant defensive coach" will have any lasting impact on a team that doesn't have the personnel to have a good defense.

your shooting guard sucks not because he sucked but because he doesnt have enough touches due to rose chucking 30 attempts and shooting 35%.

The Bulls' SG sucked because his name was Keith Bogans. This might be the first time I've ever seen someone try to argue that Keith Bogans needs more shots. And that they need to be taken away from the MVP of the league!!!!!!!!!!! :lol:

defense can be improved by effort but not offense which requires skill.

Kyle Korver gives 100% effort on defense, all the time. Why isn't he a good defender, then? Don't you think that it might have something to do with his physical limitations, hint hint?

actually rose didnt need to carry it but because he wants to score than to pass, then dont expect rose will just defer to whoever your shooting guard is.

Rose didn't need to carry the offense load? Explain.

he didnt even defer to boozer who is a big man who has a 60% TS before joining bulls, so why the hell you expect him to defer on a less efficient shooting guard.

I am not even going to explain Boozer's situation...not even worth my time at this point.

boyz2knicks · Post #20 » by **boyz2knicks** » Sat Jul 23, 2011 9:00 am

bullsnewdynasty wrote:

Last time I checked, Chauncey Billups and Tony Parker still had rings.

LOL if you think tony parker and chauncey billups are the 1st options then ok genius.

You might be the only person in the world that thinks D'Antoni is a better coach than Thibs. Dan Tony ball will never win championships, period.

I find it funny that you think it's so easy to get a defensive center. It must be why half of the league is looking for one of them. And at anyone that thinks a "assistant defensive coach" will have any lasting impact on a team that doesn't have the personnel to have a good defense.

haha your team will be like the sixers. overachieve in one season by going to the finals and sucked for the rest of the years. defensive teams are like that. players get injuries through defense and eventually will get tired of playing defense. players are already hinting that they dont like to play with thibs. so injuries are already expected from your team. i prefer teams who wins through offense during the regular season and step up their defense in the postseason so their health will be preserved. thats why dantonis suns and mavs were good year in year out. all they need is a defensive center and a defensive coach. whereas your players are fatigued by giving 100% effort every game. LOL thats what you get from coaches who have no talent in creating plays so they rather push their players to put their bodies on the line and be prone to injuries

The Bulls' SG sucked because his name was Keith Bogans. This might be the first time I've ever seen someone try to argue that Keith Bogans needs more shots. And that they need to be taken away from the MVP of the league!!!!!!!!!!!

its not bogans that im trying to mean. its boozer who can score 20 ppg but regressed to 17 ppg so that means that your team have already maxed out in offense. they will not improve. even if you put jr smith. jr smith will likely produce what bogans produced or increase by 1-2 ppg of what bogans produced.

Kyle Korver gives 100% effort on defense, all the time. Why isn't he a good defender, then? Don't you think that it might have something to do with his physical limitations, hint hint?

yah athleticism is now a skill.LOL at this genius

Rose didn't need to carry the offense load? Explain.

because he has boozer who can carry the offense in utah. they made the conference finals with boozer. yet he was relegated as a role player because rose wants to be the man on that team

Better future?