Top 10 Bulls of the post dynasty era

[Stratmaster]

So Zach has played for bad teams? You're always saying every season how we're actually better than most people think and how we're most likely going to make the playoffs even though we never do.

Is your position that the teams around Zach Lavine have been as good as the teams around Derrick Rose were?

No, and that's not even the point of my comment.

You're basically saying it can't be held against Zach for not leading his teams to the playoffs as a way to negate Rose's playoff success, yet every year you say we're going to be over .500 and make the playoffs. Those seem like contradictory opinions.

I said they would win at least 40 games. They did. Doug still owes me a pizza because I refuse to collect. I would rather he owe me. In not sure what else you are talking about. My win prediction success has nothing to do with which player is better.

The year Rose missed completely the Bulls won 47 games and went to the playoffs. To say Rose didn't have way better support around him is like saying Rose was a great defender. And if one acknowledges that Rose had great talent, great fitting players, and a great head coach around him; while Lavvie has only had 1 great player who was a horrible fit, and two clowns as head coaches then one has to acknowledge that the "but playoffs" argument is ridiculous.

That's why some (not you) keep avoiding the subject and moving goalposts.

[NZB2323]

Is your position that the teams around Zach Lavine have been as good as the teams around Derrick Rose were?

No, and that's not even the point of my comment.

You're basically saying it can't be held against Zach for not leading his teams to the playoffs as a way to negate Rose's playoff success, yet every year you say we're going to be over .500 and make the playoffs. Those seem like contradictory opinions.

I said they would win at least 40 games. They did. Doug still owes me a pizza because I refuse to collect. I would rather he owe me. In not sure what else you are talking about. My win prediction success has nothing to do with which player is better.

The year Rose missed completely the Bulls won 47 games and went to the playoffs. To say Rose didn't have way better support around him is like saying Rose was a great defender. And if one acknowledges that Rose had great talent, great fitting players, and a great head coach around him; while Lavvie has only had 1 great player who was a horrible fit, and two clowns as head coaches then one has to acknowledge that the "but playoffs" argument is ridiculous.

That's why some (not you) keep avoiding the subject and moving goalposts.

Okay, but then what about Jimmy Butler?

The Bulls were 1-5 without him in 2017, 5-10 without him in 2016, and when they traded him away they went from 41 wins to 27.

They also lost Wade and Rondo, but Rondo only turned it on for national tv games, Wade was 35 and has even admitted that he treated his time here like a vacation. On/Off numbers suggest the team was better when they weren’t playing.

Zach went 9-15 with the 2018 Chicago Bulls. Butler went 40-36 with the 2017 Chicago Bulls. The supporting casts aren’t that different. The Timberwolves went 37-22 with Butler in 2018. The Timberwolves went 16-31 with Lavine in 2017.

If we’re talking most talented Bull since 98, are we sure it isn’t Butler? We saw him lead a team to the finals twice. He had the talent.

[ChiTownHero1992]

Mine would be:

1. Derrick Rose
2. Ben Gordon
3. Joakim Noah
4. DeMar DeRozan - personally think he out performed Lavine but wasn't here long and didn't like his fit
5. Jimmy Butler - was only really a "star" for maybe 1 season
6. Pau Gasol - his limited time was a like a career resurence
7. Zach Lavine - as much as I hate him he has been the franchise face for 7 years unfortunately
8. Carlos Boozer - again, like him or hate him, he was Rose's second in command
9. Vuc - like him or hate him, his numbers still show he was one of the better players last few years
10. Luol Deng - only other real all-star talent i can think of (Wade's Chicago vacation doesn't count)

Honorable Mentions.
Elton Brand - limited time but was going to be their star
Captain Kirk - longevity, leadership, etc

My top 10 fav: Rose, Noah, Kirk, Deng, Noc, Gibson, Butler, Asik, Brad Miller, Ayo

[dougthonus]

I said they would win at least 40 games. They did. Doug still owes me a pizza because I refuse to collect. I would rather he owe me. In not sure what else you are talking about. My win prediction success has nothing to do with which player is better.

The year Rose missed completely the Bulls won 47 games and went to the playoffs. To say Rose didn't have way better support around him is like saying Rose was a great defender. And if one acknowledges that Rose had great talent, great fitting players, and a great head coach around him; while Lavvie has only had 1 great player who was a horrible fit, and two clowns as head coaches then one has to acknowledge that the "but playoffs" argument is ridiculous.

That's why some (not you) keep avoiding the subject and moving goalposts.

The Bulls won 62 games and were on pace for 62 games in the strike shortened season with Rose prior to his injury, the next year without him they won 45 games. So you are saying Rose added 17 wins? That's super star stuff.

The Bulls were basically without Zach LaVine last year, and their record was the same as the year before, the team won 40 games without him. If Zach were equivalent to Rose, then why were they not on pace for 57 wins with Zach? Zach should add 17 wins right? Why are they not on a pace for a better record this year? Is it because they lost Caruso and DeMar and those guys are worth 17 wins? Then that would be a tough argument that his cast sucked before.

Zach also has a good coach, because you hate Billy Donovan doesn't make him a lousy coach. That would contradict the opinion of all the players who play for him and more or less any unbiased view. I'd agree Thibodeau is a better coach, but Donovan isn't a "clown" coach and you would struggle to find any unbiased sources that would think that. Fair chance he will be in the basketball hall of fame some day. Boylen certainly was a clown coach.

[Stratmaster]

I said they would win at least 40 games. They did. Doug still owes me a pizza because I refuse to collect. I would rather he owe me. In not sure what else you are talking about. My win prediction success has nothing to do with which player is better.

The year Rose missed completely the Bulls won 47 games and went to the playoffs. To say Rose didn't have way better support around him is like saying Rose was a great defender. And if one acknowledges that Rose had great talent, great fitting players, and a great head coach around him; while Lavvie has only had 1 great player who was a horrible fit, and two clowns as head coaches then one has to acknowledge that the "but playoffs" argument is ridiculous.

That's why some (not you) keep avoiding the subject and moving goalposts.

The Bulls won 62 games and were on pace for 62 games in the strike shortened season with Rose prior to his injury, the next year without him they won 45 games. So you are saying Rose added 17 wins? That's super star stuff.

The Bulls were basically without Zach LaVine last year, and their record was the same as the year before, the team won 40 games without him. If Zach were equivalent to Rose, then why were they not on pace for 57 wins with Zach? Zach should add 17 wins right? Why are they not on a pace for a better record this year? Is it because they lost Caruso and DeMar and those guys are worth 17 wins? Then that would be a tough argument that his cast sucked before.

Zach also has a good coach, because you hate Billy Donovan doesn't make him a lousy coach. That would contradict the opinion of all the players who play for him and more or less any unbiased view. I'd agree Thibodeau is a better coach, but Donovan isn't a "clown" coach and you would struggle to find any unbiased sources that would think that. Fair chance he will be in the basketball hall of fame some day. Boylen certainly was a clown coach.

You're not serious are you? The Bulls had 5 other players who played significant minutes on that 62 win team, including 4 who played 80 games or more and 1 starter, who are no longer there in the 47 win season. You know better than to assign the difference in records between seasons to 1 player. They also had Boozer who was a shell of who he was in the 62 win season.

As far as Donovan, how you can watch recent games and still defend him is beyond me. He is horrible.

The Bulls swapped Demar and Caruso for Giddey and Duarte. Yet they will likely win more games this season.

[dougthonus]

You're not serious are you? The Bulls had 5 other players who played significant minutes on that 62 win team, including 4 who played 80 games or more and 1 starter, who are no longer there in the 47 win season. You know better than to assign the difference in records between seasons to 1 player. They also had Boozer who was a shell of who he was in the 62 win season.

You are missing the forest for the trees. The Bulls lost Derrick Rose and their record changed by 17 games. The Bulls lost Zach Lavine for most of a season, and they only won one fewer games (and their record was radically better after Zach was out).

This isn't about raw win totals. It is about what happened when each player was gone. When Derrick Rose was gone, the Bulls changed from a team with the best record in the NBA for consecutive seasons to a slightly above average team. When Zach LaVine was gone, they didn't change at all.

And you brought up these scenarios about Derrick Rose leaving, so this is the objective outcomes of the argument you initiated, not some random stuff I'm bringing up on my own.

The Bulls swapped Demar and Caruso for Giddey and Duarte. Yet they will likely win more games this season.

They swapped those guys and got Zach LaVine and Lonzo Ball back. They also are presently on pace for 36.5 wins per ESPN's BPI projection which is worse than last year, not better. Happy to look at some other projection tool, but that was the first one I could find.

[TheGOATRises007]

This is honestly quite the hill to die on that LaVine was more talented/better than Rose

Actually in disbelief reading some of those posts from a good poster too.

[Ice Man]

I could see the argument that LaVine is more talented that Rose. Zach is more talented than almost anybody. World-class speed and hops, extraordinary nimble (including when airborne), great handle, excellent shot. If you're measuring a guy just by his abilities in a gym scrimmage, he's as good as they get.

His value drops a lot though when you place him in a 5-man game, given his limitations off the ball (both offensively and defensively), as well as his poor late-game decisions and lack of leadership.

So, for value rather than sheer talent, he's not peak quality Rose. Definitely a good and positive player, though.

[prolific passer]

I could see the argument that LaVine is more talented that Rose. Zach is more talented than almost anybody. World-class speed and hops, extraordinary nimble (including when airborne), great handle, excellent shot. If you're measuring a guy just by his abilities in a gym scrimmage, he's as good as they get.

His value drops a lot though when you place him in a 5-man game, given his limitations off the ball (both offensively and defensively), as well as his poor late-game decisions and lack of leadership.

So, for value rather than sheer talent, he's not peak quality Rose. Definitely a good and positive player, though.

The way I see it is that Lavine can do some things better than Rose and Rose can do some things better than Lavine but which of their talents can help you win more? Rose seems like the obvious answer.

[bledredwine]

Wow, we suck!

These lists look terrible.
But I agree with most of them.

Rose
Jimmy
Gordon (fight me)
Deng
Lavine
Noah
Demar
Boozer
Pau
Brand

[panthermark]

Wow, we suck!

These lists look terrible.
But I agree with most of them.

Rose
Jimmy
Gordon (fight me)
Deng
Lavine
Noah
Demar
Boozer
Pau
Brand

Oh I remember those days! Be it here, or on the ESPN board before I came here.

I take it you were one of the BG7 over Kirk guys?

Just pointing this out, as Chicago Bulls:

MJ is #1 in career assists.
Pippen is #2 in career assists.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career assists.

MJ is #1 in career steals.
Pippen is #2 in career steals.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career steals.

MJ is #1 in games played.
Pippen is #2 in games played.
Captain Kirk is #3 in games played.


Lavine is #1 in made 3's.
Kirk is #2 in made 3's
Coby is #3 in made 3's
Pippen is #4 in made 3's
BG7 is #5 in made 3's.

Captain Kirk is #9 in career points.

How did you leave Captain Kirk off the list?

[bledredwine]

Wow, we suck!

These lists look terrible.
But I agree with most of them.

Rose
Jimmy
Gordon (fight me)
Deng
Lavine
Noah
Demar
Boozer
Pau
Brand

Oh I remember those days! Be it here, or on the ESPN board before I came here.

I take it you were one of the BG7 over Kirk guys?

Just pointing this out, as Chicago Bulls:

MJ is #1 in career assists.
Pippen is #2 in career assists.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career assists.

MJ is #1 in career steals.
Pippen is #2 in career steals.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career steals.

MJ is #1 in games played.
Pippen is #2 in games played.
Captain Kirk is #3 in games played.


Lavine is #1 in made 3's.
Kirk is #2 in made 3's
Coby is #3 in made 3's
Pippen is #4 in made 3's
BG7 is #5 in made 3's.

Captain Kirk is #9 in career points.

How did you leave Captain Kirk off the list?

Not only do I have Gordon above Kirk but by quite a margin.

Kirk drove me nuts because he’d camp out on the perimeter and we were badly in need of penetration for shot creation.

[prolific passer]

Wow, we suck!

These lists look terrible.
But I agree with most of them.

Rose
Jimmy
Gordon (fight me)
Deng
Lavine
Noah
Demar
Boozer
Pau
Brand

Oh I remember those days! Be it here, or on the ESPN board before I came here.

I take it you were one of the BG7 over Kirk guys?

Just pointing this out, as Chicago Bulls:

MJ is #1 in career assists.
Pippen is #2 in career assists.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career assists.

MJ is #1 in career steals.
Pippen is #2 in career steals.
Captain Kirk is #3 in career steals.

MJ is #1 in games played.
Pippen is #2 in games played.
Captain Kirk is #3 in games played.


Lavine is #1 in made 3's.
Kirk is #2 in made 3's
Coby is #3 in made 3's
Pippen is #4 in made 3's
BG7 is #5 in made 3's.

Captain Kirk is #9 in career points.

How did you leave Captain Kirk off the list?

Kirk was great from 03-07 but fell off and was never the same really. Many think if Gordon stayed that he doesn't fall off and the bulls probably win the 2011 title with him on the team taking pressure off Rose. He was also very clutch.

[NZB2323]

I said they would win at least 40 games. They did. Doug still owes me a pizza because I refuse to collect. I would rather he owe me. In not sure what else you are talking about. My win prediction success has nothing to do with which player is better.

The year Rose missed completely the Bulls won 47 games and went to the playoffs. To say Rose didn't have way better support around him is like saying Rose was a great defender. And if one acknowledges that Rose had great talent, great fitting players, and a great head coach around him; while Lavvie has only had 1 great player who was a horrible fit, and two clowns as head coaches then one has to acknowledge that the "but playoffs" argument is ridiculous.

That's why some (not you) keep avoiding the subject and moving goalposts.

The Bulls won 62 games and were on pace for 62 games in the strike shortened season with Rose prior to his injury, the next year without him they won 45 games. So you are saying Rose added 17 wins? That's super star stuff.

The Bulls were basically without Zach LaVine last year, and their record was the same as the year before, the team won 40 games without him. If Zach were equivalent to Rose, then why were they not on pace for 57 wins with Zach? Zach should add 17 wins right? Why are they not on a pace for a better record this year? Is it because they lost Caruso and DeMar and those guys are worth 17 wins? Then that would be a tough argument that his cast sucked before.

Zach also has a good coach, because you hate Billy Donovan doesn't make him a lousy coach. That would contradict the opinion of all the players who play for him and more or less any unbiased view. I'd agree Thibodeau is a better coach, but Donovan isn't a "clown" coach and you would struggle to find any unbiased sources that would think that. Fair chance he will be in the basketball hall of fame some day. Boylen certainly was a clown coach.

You're not serious are you? The Bulls had 5 other players who played significant minutes on that 62 win team, including 4 who played 80 games or more and 1 starter, who are no longer there in the 47 win season. You know better than to assign the difference in records between seasons to 1 player. They also had Boozer who was a shell of who he was in the 62 win season.

As far as Donovan, how you can watch recent games and still defend him is beyond me. He is horrible.

The Bulls swapped Demar and Caruso for Giddey and Duarte. Yet they will likely win more games this season.

Why do the Bulls have a better record in games that Zach Lavine doesn't play?

We're 206-218 in games he doesn't play, for a 48.6% winning percentage.
We're 173-240 in games he does play, for a 41.9% winning percentage.