Chicagos problem

[Deepness5134]

I completely agree with picc. And I don't think it's just going to cause problems in the playoffs. It's going to cause problems always. The team as constructed requires a deadeye at SG, and we went out and fetched the opposite. The offense, imo, will struggle to be even mediocre. It would take an evolution from Rose to achieve even that.

I agree that our offense required that, but Hinrich was far from a dead eye shooter. And with me thinking along the lines of our GM, I would rather have Brewer at 5mil than Hinrich at 9mil for trading purposes. Yes Hinrich needed to be traded to try aand get LBJ, but lets be serious...we're still better off w/o him. Our future is better w/o him.

When the Grizz's lose their mind again and decide to trade Gasol and Mayo, we'll alteast have a shot at that. Or when E. Gordon gets sick of the Clips, we can try and pry him away. In a few years when B. Gordon's contract isn't as crazy...we can bring him back. Welcome Home B. Gordon. Now start knockin down those 3s. Boom.

None of that is going to happen most likely, but it's more possible with Korver/Brewer/Watson as trade bait than Hinrich.

The Glaring hole at SG looks bigger than it is because that, to me, is our only weakness in terms of being a complete team.

[bullsnewdynasty]

I agree with this 1000% A lot of Bulls fans don't want to hear this...but it is the truth. I think Brewer is going to be great for the Bulls...but come deep play-off time...teams are going to "Rondo" him. And we will be playing teams that have as much...ANDt more....talent than we have. We simply can't afford to have no three point shooting on the floor.

Pretty much. Except worse, since Brewer doesn't possess any of Rondo's other offensive talents. And because the Jazz personnel were more suited to mitigating his weaknesses than the Bulls personnel is.

And as noted, Korver solves that problem on offense but presents an equal problem on defense. I don't know. Obviously the Bulls couldn't force some of the other FA guards to sign with them, but i'm not a fan of making moves just to make moves.

Now is a player who plays above average defense and knock down the 3 at an OK clip worth 9 million a year?

Not for a team thats barely making the playoffs, no. For a team on the verge of contending for a championship, sure. Adam Morrison and Luke Walton were making $10 million between them last year. I would have driven both of them to the airport for Kirk Hinrich and his $9 million, and the Lakers would have won the title much more comfortably.

For comparison, if your team had kept Hinrich and managed to trick Denver into the Melo/Deng trade, boom, you're contending for a title this year. In that case, i'd say its definitely worth it.

You're wrong, Magic are paying Rashard Lewis $20 million a year and he's still overpaid. If Lewis was on the Raptors, would that make him more overpaid?

[bullsnewdynasty]

And not to mention that Bulls tries to dump Kirk for years with no team willing to pull the trigger for anything besides garbage expirings, if that. Brewer and Korver are much better assets on their current contracts, for the Bulls on the court, and/or to include in trade down the road.

[BrooklynBulls]

I agree that our offense required that, but Hinrich was far from a dead eye shooter. And with me thinking along the lines of our GM, I would rather have Brewer at 5mil than Hinrich at 9mil for trading purposes. Yes Hinrich needed to be traded to try aand get LBJ, but lets be serious...we're still better off w/o him. Our future is better w/o him.

My argument is not that keeping Hinrich would solve anything. It's that having Brewer is a problem. Keeping Hinrich would have just been a different problem.

The Glaring hole at SG looks bigger than it is because that, to me, is our only weakness in terms of being a complete team.

It's a glaring hole because the problem is glaring. Lots of teams have problems. This one, any casual observer can point out. Brewer's an okay player, but he's not going to be a fit. I guess I can be proven wrong, so I guess we'll see, but I do doubt it.

[picc]

You're wrong, Magic are paying Rashard Lewis $20 million a year and he's still overpaid. If Lewis was on the Raptors, would that make him more overpaid?

Absolutely it would.

[Rerisen]

Seems like this thread has evolved away from Melo (who obviously isn't the answer to Chicago's 'problem') to just being about why the Bulls aren't a championship favorite, but rather a longshot at best. Who doesn't already know this?

[Ron Harper]

Seems like this thread has evolved away from Melo (who obviously isn't the answer to Chicago's 'problem') to just being about why the Bulls aren't a championship favorite, but rather a longshot at best. Who doesn't already know this?

Season hasn't even started yet. It's becoming more and more difficult to frequent the Bulls board with all the shooting talk.

It's like you guys have convinced, absolutely convinced, yourselves that we are going to be a terrible offensive team based on shooting.

That may or may not be the case, but there are way too many variables involved. Scheme, chemistry, player development, rotations, etc etc..

All the "we have no shooting, we are doomed" talk does is diminish the interesting preseason talk. I'd much rather ponder the offensive scheme Thibs is going to run, or how much zone we will play. Stuff that is a little more concrete at the moment. The doomsday speculation takes some of the fun and discussion away from things. Hard to have a discussion in the pouring rain.

[Rerisen]

Seems like this thread has evolved away from Melo (who obviously isn't the answer to Chicago's 'problem') to just being about why the Bulls aren't a championship favorite, but rather a longshot at best. Who doesn't already know this?

Season hasn't even started yet. It's becoming more and more difficult to frequent the Bulls board with all the shooting talk.

It's like you guys have convinced, absolutely convinced, yourselves that we are going to be a terrible offensive team based on shooting.

That may or may not be the case, but there are way too many variables involved. Scheme, chemistry, player development, rotations, etc etc..

All the "we have no shooting, we are doomed" talk does is diminish the interesting preseason talk. I'd much rather ponder the offensive scheme Thibs is going to run, or how much zone we will play. Stuff that is a little more concrete at the moment. The doomsday speculation takes some of the fun and discussion away from things. Hard to have a discussion in the pouring rain.

I don't see how your post is a response to mine at all. There is no "doomed" that I see. The Bulls will be vastly better than last year. Vastly better on offense too, when they actually were "terrible". But they won't be great on offense (probably middle of the pack) and yes, lack of shooting and spacing will be one reason why. 3 pointers are one of the most efficient ways to get points, along with easy scores in the paint and FT drawing (which the Bulls also are not great at). You simply cannot expect the Bulls to hammer in dunks and layups for 48 minutes with Boozer, Rose and Brewer getting in there every time, thus producing a top offense. It will be too easy to gameplan against that due to the team's lack of versatility.

So for me to say the Bulls are not a favorite or top contender (most analysts have them around 4th in the East, maybe 3rd optimistically), is the majority opinion, and incongruous with being called out as a doom caller.

[panthermark]

All the "we have no shooting, we are doomed" talk does is diminish the interesting preseason talk. I'd much rather ponder the offensive scheme Thibs is going to run, or how much zone we will play. Stuff that is a little more concrete at the moment. The doomsday speculation takes some of the fun and discussion away from things. Hard to have a discussion in the pouring rain.

There really are not that many people saying we are "doomed"....

We are still going to the play-offs....

But our lack of outside shooting in the startig line-up is without a doubt our team's biggest weakness. Just because you don't want to talk about it does not mean that it is unimportant.

[Ron Harper]

All the "we have no shooting, we are doomed" talk does is diminish the interesting preseason talk. I'd much rather ponder the offensive scheme Thibs is going to run, or how much zone we will play. Stuff that is a little more concrete at the moment. The doomsday speculation takes some of the fun and discussion away from things. Hard to have a discussion in the pouring rain.

There really are not that many people saying we are "doomed"....

We are still going to the play-offs....

But our lack of outside shooting in the startig line-up is without a doubt our team's biggest weakness. Just because you don't want to talk about it does not mean that it is unimportant.

I guess I'll just wait for the season to start before I pass such severe judgements on our roster.

[panthermark]

All the "we have no shooting, we are doomed" talk does is diminish the interesting preseason talk. I'd much rather ponder the offensive scheme Thibs is going to run, or how much zone we will play. Stuff that is a little more concrete at the moment. The doomsday speculation takes some of the fun and discussion away from things. Hard to have a discussion in the pouring rain.

There really are not that many people saying we are "doomed"....

We are still going to the play-offs....

But our lack of outside shooting in the startig line-up is without a doubt our team's biggest weakness. Just because you don't want to talk about it does not mean that it is unimportant.

I guess I'll just wait for the season to start before I pass such severe judgements on our roster.

There you go again....

What severe judgement is being passed? That we lack three point shooting?

You are the one that is accusing "us" of saying we are doomed. No one is taking that postion...you are "assigning" that judgement to us....then complaining about it.

[picc]

One pickup I did like for the Bulls was Tom Thibodeau. I think that change is very underrated. I didn't follow the Bulls religiously like their fans did, obviously, but my impression coming away from your last two playoff series is that Vinny del Negro is a woefully underqualified coach. Thibs will be a HUGE upgrade, especially in the defensive department. The improvement on that end alone will serve to offset some of the offensive troubles. As this league has proven, if you can defend at an elite level, you can play against anybody.

[Ron Harper]

You can argue semantics. Don't care. I think it's understood that I feel pretty much the opposite about our offense than the majority of the Bulls board. Which is to say I think we will be much more capable offensively this year than, well, as long as I can remember. I also think the 3pt shooting is a non issue right now. The way Thibs runs his offense, the sets he calles, the progress of players, even the rotations will play a part of the 3pt shooting. Want to see what kind of team we have under Thibs before I can even have an opinion on that specific part of the game.

I'm excited. I think we are going to have a really fun team to watch offensively. Lots of screens, cuts to the basket, pick and rolls...just more..patience. It's just a much more fundamentally sound team.


Underline and italics all you want though because you don't agree with my adjectives.

[Ron Harper]

One pickup I did like for the Bulls was Tom Thibodeau. I think that change is very underrated. I didn't follow the Bulls religiously like their fans did, obviously, but my impression coming away from your last two playoff series is that Vinny del Negro is a woefully underqualified coach. Thibs will be a HUGE upgrade, especially in the defensive department. The improvement on that end alone will serve to offset some of the offensive troubles. As this league has proven, if you can defend at an elite level, you can play against anybody.

I can honestly say Thibs was my favorite part of the offseason for the Bulls. I think if he can improve us defensively, and we clean up the boards like we should, we are going to keep a lot of games close late.

From there, it's just a matter of how good D-Rose really is when big games are close.

[Rerisen]

You can argue semantics. Don't care. I think it's understood that I feel pretty much the opposite about our offense than the majority of the Bulls board.

A lot of opinions get misunderstood because people don't clearly lay out their expectations I think.

If the doomsday people (as you label them) are predicting an average offense for the Bulls (that'd be around 13th-17th, still a huge leap from last year), then what does you being "opposite" of that opinion mean?

Top 5 offense?

[Ron Harper]

You can argue semantics. Don't care. I think it's understood that I feel pretty much the opposite about our offense than the majority of the Bulls board.

A lot of opinions get misunderstood because people don't clearly lay out their expectations I think.

If the doomsday people (as you label them) are predicting an average offense for the Bulls (that'd be around 13th-17th, still a huge leap from last year), then what does you being "opposite" of that opinion mean?

Top 5 offense?

More specifically about our shooting woes. A few pages back BB had some pretty strong views to how bad the Bulls offense will be.

[Ron Harper]

I completely agree with picc. And I don't think it's just going to cause problems in the playoffs. It's going to cause problems always. The team as constructed requires a deadeye at SG, and we went out and fetched the opposite. The offense, imo, will struggle to be even mediocre. It would take an evolution from Rose to achieve even that.

This is the original quote to what I was responding to. It's his opinion, but I know for a fact that many Bulls fans on here would +1 this quote.

I just don't view our offensive being that way at all.

[KushIsMyCologne]

I completely agree with picc. And I don't think it's just going to cause problems in the playoffs. It's going to cause problems always. The team as constructed requires a deadeye at SG, and we went out and fetched the opposite. The offense, imo, will struggle to be even mediocre. It would take an evolution from Rose to achieve even that.

This is the original quote to what I was responding to. It's his opinion, but I know for a fact that many Bulls fans on here would +1 this quote.

I just don't view our offensive being that way at all.

I'm gonna side with Harper here. BB kinda went off the deep end there IMO.

[Rerisen]

I completely agree with picc. And I don't think it's just going to cause problems in the playoffs. It's going to cause problems always. The team as constructed requires a deadeye at SG, and we went out and fetched the opposite. The offense, imo, will struggle to be even mediocre. It would take an evolution from Rose to achieve even that.

This is the original quote to what I was responding to. It's his opinion, but I know for a fact that many Bulls fans on here would +1 this quote.

I just don't view our offensive being that way at all.

I think his prediction is on the minority negative side, even though he's in the majority in thinking the shooting will be a problem in general.

Teams have won titles with low 3pt totals even in the modern era (04 Pistons: 333 threes, 24th overall) (99 Spurs: 172 threes, 24th overall).

But those were elite elite defensive teams (1st and 2nd respectively). I don't think the Bulls quite have the defensive parts to achieve that defensive dominance necessary to offset their more average offense like those teams.

[panthermark]

You can argue semantics. Don't care. I think it's understood that I feel pretty much the opposite about our offense than the majority of the Bulls board. Which is to say I think we will be much more capable offensively this year than, well, as long as I can remember. I also think the 3pt shooting is a non issue right now. The way Thibs runs his offense, the sets he calles, the progress of players, even the rotations will play a part of the 3pt shooting. Want to see what kind of team we have under Thibs before I can even have an opinion on that specific part of the game.

I'm excited. I think we are going to have a really fun team to watch offensively. Lots of screens, cuts to the basket, pick and rolls...just more..patience. It's just a much more fundamentally sound team.


Underline and italics all you want though because you don't agree with my adjectives.

1. So are you saying that the MAJORITY of the Bulls board thinks we will be LESS capable offensively than we have been in a long time? That is called a straw-man argument.....and that is why I'm underlining your adjectives.
2. So you tell "us" to wait for the season to start before we can express our concerns....yet you already know how Thibs will run his offense and that it will take care of our lack of three-point shooting?
3. Dude, ALL of us are excited....not just you.... But just because you are not concerned about our lack of outside shooting does not give you the right to cast those that are as some type of "doomsday" messengers.
We lack three point shooting...that is a fact. Now if you want to take the position that we should wait (until the season) and see what happens...then that means that YOUR prediction of it not being an issue is just as premature as those of us who ARE concerned.