Talk Me Down: How is Deng not MVP of the Bulls?

[Rerisen]

If we buy what is being peddled in this thread, and this is to the pro-Deng side, then is Deng a top 10 player in the league?

Seems the argument for his over Rose is almost entirely built on simply RAPM or what it's derived from. Well Deng is top 10 in RAPM for the last two years now.

If we are going to trust it implicitly then I think you have to go all the way and trust it. Not just within Chicago.

Seems odd though if Deng is top 10, with essentially the same game he's always had, his impact wasn't nearly so large for three years between 08 and 2010. Just maybe what these same numbers are suggesting is Deng's impact is pretty highly team (or and coach/system) dependent. Which would make it hard to divorce his value from Rose in a vacuum when Rose is such a big part of the current team make-up.

[alucryts]

Place where my mind is at right now:

Everyone's really pretty much fine with the idea that

On offense: Rose > Deng
On defense: Deng > Rose

So to some extent pitting them against each other seems like it should miss the point. The real issue relating to this thread then would be:

Just how big is Deng's defensive impact? If it's as big as RAPM seems to indicate, then is Rose vs Deng even a debate?

Thing is though, while everyone will agree that Deng's an excellent defender, him being a DPOY kinda guy is a pretty mind-blowing recent event.

What are y'all's thoughts on this facet?

I think that is agreeable. I think RAPM inflates his defensive impact. Deng is a great defender, but DPOY he is not.

[alucryts]

If we buy what is being peddled in this thread, and this is to the pro-Deng side, then is Deng a top 10 player in the league?

Seems the argument for his over Rose is almost entirely built on simply RAPM or what it's derived from. Well Deng is top 10 in RAPM for the last two years now.

If we are going to trust it implicitly then I think you have to go all the way and trust it. Not just within Chicago.

Seems odd though if Deng is top 10, with essentially the same game he's always had, his impact wasn't nearly so large for three years between 08 and 2010. Just maybe what these same numbers are suggesting is Deng's impact is pretty highly team (or and coach/system) dependent. Which would make it hard to divorce his value from Rose in a vacuum when Rose is such a big part of the current team make-up.

I agree to all of this; great way to put it.

[Doctor MJ]

If we buy what is being peddled in this thread, and this is to the pro-Deng side, then is Deng a top 10 player in the league?

Seems the argument for his over Rose is almost entirely built on simply RAPM or what it's derived from. Well Deng is top 10 in RAPM for the last two years now.

If we are going to trust it implicitly then I think you have to go all the way and trust it. Not just within Chicago.

Seems odd though if Deng is top 10, with essentially the same game he's always had, his impact wasn't nearly so large for three years between 08 and 2010. Just maybe what these same numbers are suggesting is Deng's impact is pretty highly team (or and coach/system) dependent. Which would make it hard to divorce his value from Rose in a vacuum when Rose is such a big part of the current team make-up.

Well, first I want to say that I made this thread because of the overall situation. I don't make threads like this just because a guy happens to have high +/-. I'll acknowledge that I am a long-time user of +/- stats, which certainly plays into why I brought them up. At the same time, if you are talking about a guy as a "no-stats all-star" because of his lack of box score stats, asking what his +/- stats are is the obvious thing to do. Once brought up, well they become the dominant quantitative aspect of the discussion, and thus a big part of the conversation.

Okay so, RAPM is indeed calling Deng a top 10 player in the league. There are a wide range of conclusions each person can come to here, but yes, Top 10 is certainly one of the options.

Re: going all the way, not just Chicago. You're a great poster, but when you say this is strikes me as defensive. An understandable reaction, but if you've really been paying attention to this stat like I have, it seems a pretty silly statement. I'm much more interested in the general basketball phenomena here than I am what, say, Derrick Rose's reputation is. Obviously I am concerned about Deng, but that's because of how odd his discrepancies are.

Anyway, I've mentioned why Deng's RAPM is harder to dismiss than guys like Nick Collison. Deng plays huge minutes, and is a focal point on defense which happens to be both the strength of his team and not the strength of his better known teammate.

Re: same as before. I brought up the phrase "epiphyte" before, which is a reference to plants that grow on other plants, like orchids. I use it here as opposed to "system player" because system player has always meant a player whose replaceability is lower than you'd expect from a superficial observation (i.e. basic stats). It's conceivable though that there are players who are hard to replace in extremely valuable roles that only fully exist in certain systems that aren't very common. (More than conceivable actually, Bill Russell fits that description after all)

I don't think there's any doubt that Deng fits this to some degree, the real question is: How hard is it to find someone to do what Deng is doing for Chicago?

[Rerisen]

Re: going all the way, not just Chicago. You're a great poster, but when you say this is strikes me as defensive

I don't think we need to go there. You phrased the title to set it up vs Rose. Could have as easily as made it about Deng being undervalued in general, which is true. And I could as easily say I don't remember you writing highly of Rose in general, I think being predisposed against scoring PGs. If this is true, then I think it's probably that you are looking for alternative reasons for the Bulls success or to redistribute credit. So maybe some provocation was intentional?

In general I think expanding it out beyond Rose though sheds more light on the subject not less, since Rose's unique importance to the Bulls (let's be honest their reliance on him is the reason they aren't favorited as much as OKC/Miami) means it can all too easily become about him and not Deng if we limit the scope to MVP of the Bulls.

Asking the top 10 question is test of the legitimacy of the whole premise.

Re: same as before. I brought up the phrase "epiphyte" before, which is a reference to plants that grow on other plants, like orchids. I use it here as opposed to "system player" because system player has always meant a player whose replaceability is lower than you'd expect from a superficial observation (i.e. basic stats). It's conceivable though that there are players who are hard to replace in extremely valuable roles that only fully exist in certain systems that aren't very common. (More than conceivable actually, Bill Russell fits that description after all)

Yes. I think we agreed on the general trend at work here a while back.

I don't think there's any doubt that Deng fits this to some degree, the real question is: How hard is it to find someone to do what Deng is doing for Chicago?

Shawn Marion? Gerald Wallace? Iggy? I think all these type of players could fit similarly well to Deng on the Bulls.

I don't think Luol has some massive secret value over them, to where if you move him to those guys teams instead of those players, those teams would get way better.

[Krodis]

I think Wallace and Iggy could be adequate replacements for Deng, but then again RAPM also thinks they're fantastic defenders and players.

Not sold that Marion could at this point in his career.

[Rerisen]

Not sold that Marion could at this point in his career.

Well but could Marion's value perhaps not leap up in the Bulls environment, much in the same way Deng's did when Thibodeau arrived and Rose completed his rise to a superstar?

I think the Bulls could also be similarly effective with a different style player than Deng at SF. Say a Danny Granger. They would lose defense but gain a much needed legit 2nd option, and 2nd shot creator.

The shots are definitely there ideally, to be taken from less efficient players and given to someone more efficient. Assuming Danny would get back to his career norms.

[Doctor MJ]

I don't think we need to go there. You phrased the title to set it up vs Rose. Could have as easily as made it about Deng being undervalued in general, which is true.

I'm trying to put people on the spot and force them to really figure out where they stand. Making a thread saying "Don't you think Deng is underrated?" wouldn't accomplish anything like this.

And I could as easily say I don't remember you writing highly of Rose in general, I think being predisposed against scoring PGs. If this is true, then I think it's probably that you are looking for alternative reasons for the Bulls success or to redistribute credit. So maybe some provocation was intentional?

Well I'm certainly a fan of pass-first point guards. If people want to call that a bias, that's okay by me. Understand though that this comes from a lot of analysis which includes being impressed with great team ORtgs and offensive APM with those type of players. If the Bulls had an amazing offense and Rose showed obvious signs of massive offensive team lift, I wouldn't be on his case.

I do think though that I've been pretty even handed about Rose. I was among the very first to state he was my #1 MVP candidate last year, and spent a lot of time defending his candidacy against others last year.

Re: provocation. Maybe I owe you an apology because as I said, I did pick the specific question of this thread to generate debate, and it doesn't surprise me that some would feel defensive for Rose. It's just frustrating to me to hear someone say "Okay, but then you've got to start applying this to teams other than Chicago!" when Chicago isn't exactly a major focus for me generally. I have to say though, compared to the homer/hate name callers out there, what you said is nothing, so maybe I should have held my tongue on this.

I don't think there's any doubt that Deng fits this to some degree, the real question is: How hard is it to find someone to do what Deng is doing for Chicago?

Shawn Marion? Gerald Wallace? Iggy? I think all these type of players could fit similarly well to Deng on the Bulls.

I don't think Luol has some massive secret value over them, to where if you move him to those guys teams instead of those players, those teams would get way better.

Well, as Krodis said, Wallace & Iggy look great by +/- too. All 3 of them are given a defensive RAPM of 3.5+, which puts them on the absolute short list of top players, and also makes their defense rank well ahead of how Rose's offense gets rated (+2.3). So equating Deng to them doesn't actually change that much.

Granted though Marion does not have those same numbers.

[Doctor MJ]

Not sold that Marion could at this point in his career.

Well but could Marion's value perhaps not leap up in the Bulls environment, much in the same way Deng's did when Thibodeau arrived and Rose completed his rise to a superstar?

I think the Bulls could also be similarly effective with a different style player than Deng at SF. Say a Danny Granger. They would lose defense but gain a much needed legit 2nd option, and 2nd shot creator.

The shots are definitely there ideally, to be taken from less efficient players and given to someone more efficient. Assuming Danny would get back to his career norms.

Well let's be careful there. Marion looked like crap for years really. His resurgence in Dallas has been something else, and I doubt it makes sense to imply that Thibs is so good that he's far smarter than the coach who can make his team's defense improve after losing Tyson Chandler.

[Rerisen]

To elaborate the point of my question a bit more, the light shed by asking if Deng is top 10 instead of just Bulls MVP, is to clarify the exact nature of the thread and argument.

If it is more about belief in the near unerring value of advanced +/- stats such as RAPM in specific, and thus about Deng being truly as good as they would suggest... Or if it’s more, Deng is just somewhat better than most think, but Rose is really worse than most think, and on account of that juxtaposition, Deng ends up MVP of the Bulls (not my view of course, but trying to clarify the opposite one).

Well let's be careful there. Marion looked like crap for years really. His resurgence in Dallas has been something else, and I doubt it makes sense to imply that Thibs is so good that he's far smarter than the coach who can make his team's defense improve after losing Tyson Chandler.

Well but also Deng didn't look that great for three years previous to 2010 either. And most Bulls fans think he is essentially the same player (outside a bit of confidence and the threeball I mentioned). His base production really hasn't changed at all, but for up here, down there. His offense in specific has been kind of dreadful this year.

So I'm trying to get at what Deng is doing so amazingly different that he would become so much more valuable than he was in 08, 09, 10.

I do think his defense is more valuable in a proper system that Thibs has instituted, because he doesn't make a lot of mistakes, but when he does make one, teammates actually have his back and cover them up.

Deng's perimeter defense and great help is more valuable when we don't have a totally inconsistent young Noah and reckless Tyrus Thomas breaking down behind him. So in that sense, a guy like Marion might see a similar cohesion boost in the Bulls system. But again, that is leading more to the system based value argument than one inherent to Deng.

IDK, maybe I'm over emphasizing the Finals. Because I saw Deng do what I thought was great work on LeBron in the ECF (yet LeBron just hit all kinds of tough shots, esp a lot of really 'bad' threes) but then Marion did just as well if not even better against him in the Finals. Which was impressive. And relevant in that Deng's value is mostly defense too.

Anyway, without regard to Marion either way, the other guys are the general level I have Deng. Whether he is uniquely more valuable to the Bulls than they are, or would be... it's hard to say he should be just looking at skill sets (and of course hard production, too) that are similar between various guys, who are well below MVP caliber types.

[alucryts]

The biggest reason I am turned off to this idea is because the more and more I learn how the Bulls defense works, the less and less I get impressed with the individual players, and the more impressed I become with Thibs. I made a series of threads on the Bulls offense on the Bulls board, and the Bulls defense is in my queue of threads to make as I feel I am getting a much better handle on what and why they do it. From a game tape point of view, your Bulls defensive MVPs are definitely the big men. Noah, Taj, and Asik are the best on the court (especially Noah lately). Noah is the Derrick Rose of our defense because it is essentially his job to call out defensive plays. The big men control the perimeter defenders like pawns out there. Boozer is actually learning how to do this as well lately (shocked face).

[Rerisen]

The biggest reason I am turned off to this idea is because the more and more I learn how the Bulls defense works, the less and less I get impressed with the individual players, and the more impressed I become with Thibs. I made a series of threads on the Bulls offense on the Bulls board, and the Bulls defense is in my queue of threads to make as I feel I am getting a much better handle on what and why they do it. From a game tape point of view, your Bulls defensive MVPs are definitely the big men. Noah, Taj, and Asik are the best on the court (especially Noah lately). Noah is the Derrick Rose of our defense because it is essentially his job to call out defensive plays. The big men control the perimeter defenders like pawns out there. Boozer is actually learning how to do this as well lately (shocked face).

RAPM thinks Thibs is the best coach too! Not sure how that gets figured, whether he gets credit for players playing better than in the past at a unit level, rather than the players themselves, or what. Maybe someone can enlighten.

You are right on Thibs mastery of teaching defense. However, again I have to put in for Derrick's value as a guy buying into this system. I heard several national guys say they expected the Bulls to take a step back this year, after Thibs whipped them all year, and they still fell short. In other words, once they realized they didn't have enough to get by Miami, and didn't add a proven top playmaker on offense to change the dynamic either. Rather like Skiles Bulls eventually deflated, or Sloan's (Deron/Boozer) Jazz.

IMO, the reason this didn't happen - I mean at ALL - is in big measure to the buy in of Rose to Thibs, and that filters down on through the team. Stats guys (and I get called a stats guy on the Bulls board, go figure) hate this talk, because they just can't see its value in numbers, but I believe it. Telling me Michael Jordan had no leadership or drive value to his team other than his PER? Un-uh.

If Luol Deng and Carlos Boozer are your team leaders, instead of Derrick Rose, suddenly Thibodeau's voice carries a lot less far. Burnout - at least to some degree, looms. I mean the Bulls are really going to play as hard on D if Carlos Boozer is your #1 option top PPG guy? Come on, scrub Keith Bogans was calling him out in practice last year. Not the team leader you want. That's why I just can't stake year long hypotheticals on Derrick Rose missing 10 games, when everyone knows as 'the Man' he will be back fairly shortly, and they only have to carry the burden for a little while.

[alucryts]

I have to agree with the Rose preventing burnout sentiment. When your unquestioned leader sits back and takes the brunt of Thibs style harder than anyone on the team, it makes a difference. I remember a Korver interview where he said exactly that. He said it means a lot that Thibs yells as much (sometimes more) at Derrick compared to everyone else. Also, there was an interview with Rasual Butler where he said the day after a game where Rose made a bunch of mistakes, he expected Derrick to be in the back of the film study kind of dodging as much attention as possible. Instead, Rose was in the front row actively owning up to mistakes and taking notes on them.

As long as Rose follows Thibs like this, I don't think his style will wear thin.

[Doctor MJ]

The biggest reason I am turned off to this idea is because the more and more I learn how the Bulls defense works, the less and less I get impressed with the individual players, and the more impressed I become with Thibs. I made a series of threads on the Bulls offense on the Bulls board, and the Bulls defense is in my queue of threads to make as I feel I am getting a much better handle on what and why they do it. From a game tape point of view, your Bulls defensive MVPs are definitely the big men. Noah, Taj, and Asik are the best on the court (especially Noah lately). Noah is the Derrick Rose of our defense because it is essentially his job to call out defensive plays. The big men control the perimeter defenders like pawns out there. Boozer is actually learning how to do this as well lately (shocked face).

This is the kind of analysis I'd like to see more of, and in more detail. What's clear to me is that the rotation of bigs of the Bulls is really having some great success. We see the rebounding for example - can it really be that the heretofore non-celebrated Deng is carrying a DPOY load on a team that just happens to have rebounding as a major calling card, which isn't exactly an area where he's spearheading the movement? Seems pretty unlikely.

But yeah, if you have links to nuanced analyses of the individual Bulls bigs, or really anything on the defense, I'd love to read it.

[Doctor MJ]

To elaborate the point of my question a bit more, the light shed by asking if Deng is top 10 instead of just Bulls MVP, is to clarify the exact nature of the thread and argument.

If it is more about belief in the near unerring value of advanced +/- stats such as RAPM in specific, and thus about Deng being truly as good as they would suggest... Or if it’s more, Deng is just somewhat better than most think, but Rose is really worse than most think, and on account of that juxtaposition, Deng ends up MVP of the Bulls (not my view of course, but trying to clarify the opposite one).

I don't really feel like it's really about either of those things. If what I've said before doesn't make clear the intentions, I don't have another explanation handy. Sorry.

Well let's be careful there. Marion looked like crap for years really. His resurgence in Dallas has been something else, and I doubt it makes sense to imply that Thibs is so good that he's far smarter than the coach who can make his team's defense improve after losing Tyson Chandler.

Well but also Deng didn't look that great for three years previous to 2010 either. And most Bulls fans think he is essentially the same player (outside a bit of confidence and the threeball I mentioned). His base production really hasn't changed at all, but for up here, down there. His offense in specific has been kind of dreadful this year.

I'm not trying to dismiss Marion as a system player here. I'm resisting the notion that Marion would be significantly better in Chicago than Dallas because in Dallas he's already made a jump back to excellence that would certainly seem to indicate he has what he needs there.

So I'm trying to get at what Deng is doing so amazingly different that he would become so much more valuable than he was in 08, 09, 10.

I do think his defense is more valuable in a proper system that Thibs has instituted, because he doesn't make a lot of mistakes, but when he does make one, teammates actually have his back and cover them up.

Deng's perimeter defense and great help is more valuable when we don't have a totally inconsistent young Noah and reckless Tyrus Thomas breaking down behind him. So in that sense, a guy like Marion might see a similar cohesion boost in the Bulls system. But again, that is leading more to the system based value argument than one inherent to Deng.

There I would just emphasize the difference between simply being a guy benefiting from the "trickle down" of superior teammates and being a guy who has tremendous impact but is dependent on certain basics being covered around him. I'm not going to assert Deng is absolutely the latter, but I think the notion that any defender is an island is really problematic.

If Deng really is doing something virtually unique and it helps the Bulls a ton, then I don't really care that it took a smart coach like Thibs to harness it. Deng should not punished because stupid coaches exist elsewhere. But of course, we don't want punish other Deng-level players because they are saddled with said stupid coaches either.

In the end, if Deng isn't doing anything that uncommon, then it's pretty doubtful he's the MVP of the Bulls.

IDK, maybe I'm over emphasizing the Finals. Because I saw Deng do what I thought was great work on LeBron in the ECF (yet LeBron just hit all kinds of tough shots, esp a lot of really 'bad' threes) but then Marion did just as well if not even better against him in the Finals. Which was impressive. And relevant in that Deng's value is mostly defense too.

Anyway, without regard to Marion either way, the other guys are the general level I have Deng. Whether he is uniquely more valuable to the Bulls than they are, or would be... it's hard to say he should be just looking at skill sets (and of course hard production, too) that are similar between various guys, who are well below MVP caliber types.

Re: Finals. Well, Marion deserves praise, but this was also a game plan which did significant double teaming, and then got an odd boost when LeBron got out of rhythm watching Wade go nuclear. I find it pretty hard to take seriously the notion that a Lebron-stopper actually exist, and the fact that when they had a rematch LeBron went for 37/10/6 on 68% TS only makes harder to take that seriously.

Okay, so with those other guys, I'll just say again: Deng doesn't necessarily have to be head & shoulder above them imho, for him to arguably be the MVP of the Bulls. The fact that several of them are right up there at the top of the defensive RAPM leaderboard right now is one of those "whoa" facts that is part of why I made this trend.

[alucryts]

This is the kind of analysis I'd like to see more of, and in more detail. What's clear to me is that the rotation of bigs of the Bulls is really having some great success. We see the rebounding for example - can it really be that the heretofore non-celebrated Deng is carrying a DPOY load on a team that just happens to have rebounding as a major calling card, which isn't exactly an area where he's spearheading the movement? Seems pretty unlikely.

But yeah, if you have links to nuanced analyses of the individual Bulls bigs, or really anything on the defense, I'd love to read it.

My spring break is coming up the week after next; I'll write a thread on the Bulls defense then with embedded Youtube videos of individual plays I will make up (just like I did with my Miami vs Chicago 4th quarter thread).

The basic idea of the Bulls defense is sidelines, walls, and baselines. The middle of the lane is the no fly zone; any player that penetrates there is a breakdown. The Bulls defense will be so tough in the middle of the lane that they will force player to drive into the wings. Here's the basic scenarios:

A) The ball handler is at the top of the key. The Bulls big men coordinate and set up expecting the drive to be steered wide enough so that the player cannot get to the rim through the paint. This part I am a little fuzzy on and need to look at more film, but I believe that the perimeter player here will play the ball handler nearly straight up, but he will definitely have a certain direction he wants to stop. Generally the idea is to force an isolation drive to drive into Noah. This next part is where Noah is our defensive MVP. On a high pick and roll, in order to preserve the middle of the lane, Noah has to guard BOTH players on the pick and roll for a short period. Once the pick happens, Noah hedges the player out just far enough to either force a WIDE drive towards the hoop or force a pass to the big man. While Noah does this, he has to maintain enough spacing between himself and the roll man to recover and stop the roll man on any possible pass. He does this exceptionally well. He is so good at it that he hedges, forces the hedge wide, shuts down the passing lane to the roll man, and recovers to the roll man before they can drive as well as shouting out where the drive should go. He is SO good at this. What helps him is that Rose and Deng are exceptionally quick at recovering from screens to get in front of their man. This is where Deng and Rose show their defensive skill; while Noah is great at what he does, Rose and Deng limit the amount of time Noah has to hold that position that increases in difficulty the longer the recovery takes.

B) The play starts at the shoulder of the three point line. This is the famous part of Thibs defense. You'll often hear Noah (and now Boozer) screaming out ICE to the perimeter defender. What this means is that the paint defender is taking over full responsibility for both his defender and the ball handler. In order to ensure this, the perimeter ball handler defender jumps out into position so that the only possible drive is baseline directly into Noah. You can now draw an arc/wall connecting the perimeter defender and the big man down low. This line will run from a step outside the three point line all the way to the baseline. It will be directly between the ball handler and the lane. The two defenders involved in the ICE defense will at all costs prevent the ball handler from crossing this wall. The ball handler can go over the top of the wall or underneath the wall along the baseline, but it takes so much time and dribbling to do that the play is killed. The ball handler will almost always drive towards the baseline where the big man defender lets him go underneath the backboard. This defense is practically impossible to score on because you can't shoot with Rose/Deng surgically attached to your shooting arm and you can't drive because Noah is waiting for you. They force pick and roll ball handlers to reject the screen and drive baseline because of how ridiculous the pick and roll is played by the perimeter player. Any passing lanes are shut down by the perimeter defender EXCLUSIVELY playing the shot and pass. By the nature of a pick and roll, a screen rejected towards the baseline eliminates all possible roll opportunities but leaves a long contested 2 point shot to the big man (exactly what the defense wants). However, this pass requires the ball handler to pass "cross court backwards" for the screener leaving the pass extremely vulnerable to being stolen by the initial perimeter defender.

C) It always happens. The above two scenarios run teams into the iso-defense. The Bulls break down all team offense and the team reverts to one on one offense. It happens every single game. The Heat love to get baited into this. The Bulls don't change anything from above, and because the team is no longer trying to make passes they are easily contained.

All of this is orchestrated by the big men in the paint who use the perimeter defenders as pawns for the defense. Rose, Deng, and Brewer are extremely good at funneling players to the right spots. THe difference between Rose and Deng/Brewer is that Deng and Brewer are not only able to deny the middle of the lane, they are also able to slow and impede drives towards the big men. That is why they are better than Rose. Rose is the best defender we have at the top of the key though and in pick and rolls; his speed, strength, size, and agility is unmatched on our defense. Opposing guards have extreme difficulty even getting shots off against him in the paint between his overwhelming physical talent and his excellent ball funneling. While Deng and Brewer show plus ability in funneling and even making what the defense WANTS the ball handler to do difficult, they are not our defensive best. That title belongs to Noah.

I'll have video to show all of this in a few weeks.

[rrravenred]

Yes, I think Rose is clearly better than Carmelo, but in both cases I believe you can make the case that part of the value of their presence is that it helped create order and a pecking order in their rosters and allowed supporting players to be supporting players where they are most effective, if that makes sense.

Absolutely. Take a player into a role where they're not suited for it, don't have the skills for it, etc. and of course their performance in that role suffers.

Having said that, I don't necessarily agree with you about the "pecking order" argument. A good coach (and I think both Thibs and Karl are good coaches) drill their players about their roles, about what they should and should not do in a game. I personally think that's more important than having a titular leader, and the Nuggs recent slide has as much to do with the Injury list occupants as it does about not having a volume shot-taker.

Correct me if I am wrong, but are you essentially saying Rose has nearly no effect on the Bulls, or it is extremely easy to replace (I might be interpreting your posts incorrectly).

Not at all.

As I think I've said before in previous discussions, whilst Rose isn't a champion at anything in particular, but is very good at a wide array of skills. Not a liability on D and is reasonably good at running an offense, as well as being a pretty potent offensive force in his own right. One of the weaker MVPs (IMO), but I also think he'll have better seasons than last year's, and that his best is still ahead of him.

What I am saying is in response to Dr Mufasa's claim that you essentially have to have an alpha volume shooter to establish a hierarchy in a team so that everyone knows their role. I disagree with this, and believe that roles are established by coaches (good coaches, at least). I do believe that some of the aspects of Rose's role could be filled effectively (maybe not as effectively) by other players. I also believe that the roles which Rose DOES fill are not necessarily the most important roles for the Bulls (especially on the defensive end, which as discussed, is the key to the effectiveness of the Bulls as a team).

[Doctor MJ]

RAPM thinks Thibs is the best coach too! Not sure how that gets figured, whether he gets credit for players playing better than in the past at a unit level, rather than the players themselves, or what. Maybe someone can enlighten.

It's my understanding that the coaches are not factored in with the featured RAPM player studies, however the players may indeed be factored in with the coach studies but please don't use that sentence to be anything to meaningful, I could be mistaken.

I always saw the coaching analysis as a fun gimmick, but to me it just doesn't really make that much sense. The idea behind modern +/- studies is that there is enough player rotation in the course of games that meaningful sample size is achievable. There is no in-game or even in-season coach rotation typically, so any +/- study for a coach is INCREDIBLY board strokes.

IMO, the reason this didn't happen - I mean at ALL - is in big measure to the buy in of Rose to Thibs, and that filters down on through the team. Stats guys (and I get called a stats guy on the Bulls board, go figure) hate this talk, because they just can't see its value in numbers, but I believe it. Telling me Michael Jordan had no leadership or drive value to his team other than his PER? Un-uh.

If Luol Deng and Carlos Boozer are your team leaders, instead of Derrick Rose, suddenly Thibodeau's voice carries a lot less far. Burnout - at least to some degree, looms. I mean the Bulls are really going to play as hard on D if Carlos Boozer is your #1 option top PPG guy? Come on, scrub Keith Bogans was calling him out in practice last year. Not the team leader you want. That's why I just can't stake year long hypotheticals on Derrick Rose missing 10 games, when everyone knows as 'the Man' he will be back fairly shortly, and they only have to carry the burden for a little while.

In all honesty, this is the type of stuff that I have trouble taking too seriously. I'm a Laker fan, and I"m constantly rolling my eyes at how the manufactured Laker narrative sanctifies every little action Kobe takes as if it all has some deeper meaning which turns his teammates from cowards to warriores. Rose is a couple years removed from paying someone to take his SATs and eating nothing but candy if the stories are to be believed. I'm not saying I think he's a bad leader, and bad leaders certainly exist, but giving huge credit boosts to every leader because he's not locker room destroyer seems a bit much. Rose is doing what he's paid to do.

[alucryts]

Not at all.

As I think I've said before in previous discussions, whilst Rose isn't a champion at anything in particular, but is very good at a wide array of skills. Not a liability on D and is reasonably good at running an offense, as well as being a pretty potent offensive force in his own right. One of the weaker MVPs (IMO), but I also think he'll have better seasons than last year's, and that his best is still ahead of him.

What I am saying is in response to Dr Mufasa's claim that you essentially have to have an alpha volume shooter to establish a hierarchy in a team so that everyone knows their role. I disagree with this, and believe that roles are established by coaches (good coaches, at least). I do believe that some of the aspects of Rose's role could be filled effectively (maybe not as effectively) by other players. I also believe that the roles which Rose DOES fill are not necessarily the most important roles for the Bulls (especially on the defensive end, which as discussed, is the key to the effectiveness of the Bulls as a team).

Ok, I didn't think you were saying that, and I figured I was interpreting your posts completely wrong. I can agree with a lot of that.

[alucryts]

Adding on to my post about the Bull's defense in detail, the spot where Deng is so important is the type of players he can play in ICE. He is the only player on our team that can actively guard the pass and shot of someone like Lebron, Danny Granger, Paul Pierce, etc. No one else on our team has the combination of length and understanding of how to play ICE like Deng. In terms of mental ability to play ICE, Rose and Brewer could replace Deng. In terms of physical length to go along with it, no one on our team can replace Deng. In this way, Deng, Brewer, and Rose serve a niche role on defense. Deng has what I just discussed while Brewer is the only guy we have that can guard a Wade type with strength, speed, and decent SG length. Rose can fill in for Brewer here, but Brewer makes life on these players much more difficult than Rose can at this point. Rose is the only player on our team that can physically remove a point guard from a team at will and match the extreme speed of point guards. Watson does a decent job at playing the defense, but he doesn't approach Rose in how dominating he can be against any point guard. On any given night, Rose will be stronger, faster, and bigger/longer than the other point guard. Only a few point guards in the NBA can even claim to match him in one of those.