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

[rrravenred]

Did you read the thread before adding that incisive three word post?

[Mo26]

Bulls proving what anybody who actually watches the game already knows. Shot-creation is the most important skill in the playoffs. lol @ the silly stat-heads.

[rrravenred]

Mo26, I'd really solidly recommend you read the thread in its entirety before typing something. There are a lot of good arguments on both sides, and you might actually learn something by doing so, which might even support your ideas from a perspective of more than someone who "just watches the game".

[Doctor MJ]

Oh... since the season for Deng and Rose is now done, I would also be curious if Doc MJ ever did 'come down off the ledge' at all?

If there is any true reason for him to come off the ledge (opinions may differ) then they have probably been touched on *somewhere* in this thread in a way that is cogent.

If he has found no worthy reasons, then I believe it is actually impossible to talk to him off said ledge, as what put him out there is something seen as unassailable in the first place, except by further evidence of the exact same type but that is in opposition to what put him out on the ledge. And that evidence actually will not be able to built except with more games and minutes, such as next year, etc.

In my opinion, the best answers were spun around as early as page 3.

Oh for crying out loud. Go back to page 9. You were there, in the middle of the discussion seeing how I saw all this.

This is all really something. I can't tell you how happy I was with this thread when we had the discussions, and it most certainly was not because I felt like the Deng side won. I was happy because I thought there was good quality thought, which was the goal. I rarely make threads. I did this one in this specific way for a reason, and it worked well at the time.

The way people are bringing it back up as if my goal was to say "The guy with better RAPM is always the better player, oh, and I hate Derrick Rose" really just makes me too angry. I'm going to stop replying and just forget about it.

I'll leave it with this since your question of how I feel now is a reasonable one to ask:

What I see in this case is a team that without Rose, Noah, and with Boozer scoring only 3 points was pretty dang unlikely not to break back and have HCA for the series, after losing the HCA when the opposing team got hot. I'd say any interpretation that says "Bulls without Rose are worse than the 76ers" is just foolishness.

However, there is still plenty of room in between "worse than the 76ers" and "as good as they appeared to be in the regular season". I am inclined to agree that the lack of a strong go to scorer is a problem for the Bulls more so against strong defense than against weak, and while the 76ers are pretty far above a normal playoff defense, playoff defenses in general are stronger than in the regular season and that's a problem for the Bulls' sans Rose. I also think that effort heavy systems like Thibs has in Chicago have a tendency to appear to underperform in the playoffs because other teams are able to close the effort gap.

So all this is a good reason not to get carried away with the Bulls regular season success sans Rose. I certainly don't have a problem with people calling Rose the clear star of the team now, but then, I never did. I'd say anyone who read the thread would know that, but you read the thread.

I said before that gun to my head, there was no doubt I'd take Rose over Deng, that still stands. When I phrased the thread like I did, it was meant to reference me not having compelling arguments to justify that gun-to-my-head reality.

Now with all that said, as I agree with people that the Bulls without Rose look worse in the playoffs, we do have to consider how much of that is a Rose-free issue. By that I mean, is there any reason to assume that the Bulls' playoff problems really go away if Rose is there? It's well and good to say that the Bulls' offense against strong playoff defenses is in trouble without Rose, but do people remember that Rose shot 35% in the ECF last year? If you replace that with Rose's regular season performance, the Bulls handily beat the Heat in that series.

Would sure seem to me then, that there is about as much evidence with and without Rose that Thibs' system struggles in the playoffs. I am inclined to believe it, in both cases, to a certain extent, but also in both cases, I urge caution. The same reasoning to be used here against the Bulls was also once used against the Big Ben Pistons. A lot of us felt pretty safe in saying that team would always be weaker in the playoffs...until it was clear that that wasn't true at all.

[mysticbb]

Rerisen, the Cavs with James used the same things they also used in other quarters. Sure, not to the extend they used it in clutch situations, but overall it was proven to be working. The Paul lead teams are using elements of the Princeton offense at the end of games, because it is working well. The Mavericks used their two-man-game with Terry and Nowitzki, because it is working well. But most teams are just going back to isos and long 3's, not because the defense gives them no other option, but because they aren't trying anything else.

For the Bulls the only real working play is the penetration by Rose. The rest is not stable enough in order to rely on. That is an issue, which gets even worse when Noah isn't there, who can at least help offensively with his post passing and offensive rebounding. The Bulls really lack such a 6th man of the year candidate, someone who can provide instant offense. JR Smith would be fine, his inconsistency wouldn't be a big problem, because his minutes would be limited. Especially without Rose such a player is needed. The Bulls likely though Rip Hamilton could have provided that and Boozer should have been good enough offensively to carry a bigger load without Rose. But both was not there in the way the Bulls needed it. But well, if CJ Watson keeps the ball or Rip Hamilton is in instead of Brewer, Asik wouldn't have needed to convert those free throws. I actually think now that it was a coaching mistake to bring in Brewer for Hamilton, because the worst thing which could have happened would have been in 3pt shoot tying the game. While in that case the Bulls would have needed an offensive play in order to score or the 76ers needed to foul anyway. Either way, I think a better offensive player would have been the better choice. And we would probably both be happier.


Doc MJ, the Bulls with Rose and Deng played like a +11 SRS team. Honestly, such a team losing in a playoffs isn't that likely. The only team with such a high SRS not winning a championship were the 72 Bucks, losing to the better Lakers team in the finals. The only thing the Bulls needed was health. Give them a healthy Rose, Noah and Deng and that team is likely going to win the championship.

[Rerisen]

Would sure seem to me then, that there is about as much evidence with and without Rose that Thibs' system struggles in the playoffs.

I would not overread the Miami series. The Bulls put up their usual point differentials last year vs Indy (+7.0) and ATL (+7.0) in the first 2 rounds, even though because of the Bulls grind it out style, those series might have appeared tougher than they were.

However, down the final minutes of those two series, Rose was the difference maker in almost all of those close games, making the big score, or the big pass, off isolation or high screen individual action. The exact thing they lacked vs Philly.

But Miami was certainly too much to handle, and well, Miami had been the better team by Point Differential last year as well (not this year). So not like it was an upset. They lost the Heat series by -2.2 a game.

Rose certainly played a bad series though, then again so did Wade, very tough defense all around. The 42% of all offense generated through Rose (or w/e the # was exactly, it led the league), was just a terrible matchup against Miami's athletic overhelp perimeter defense. You need shooting to dismantle that defense, and the Bulls shot horribly in the series, especially Korver (.424 TS%), and Bogans (.464 TS%).

Just a shame we didn't get to see that matchup this year, because the Bulls had made definite strides on offense. In the vein of Mysticbb's numbers, the Bulls were at a 67 win pace with Rose this year.

I would say precisely because of the Bulls style, great defense and rebounding are such consistent factors game to game, it makes having that go-to guy late even more essential to a team like Chicago has built. You are going to be in a lot of close games vs even competition.

If you had instead, say an offensive team, with let's say Melo as a second star (instead of Deng and Noah), the Bulls would be a much more volatile team, capable of getting clear of their opponents more often, even without Rose. They'd probably also lose big more often. But overall perhaps be in less critical situations.

And this consistency I talk about generated from defense and rebounding, that is there every night far moreso than the fluctuations inherent in shooting the ball, is I think the same thing that helped the Bulls run roughshod over lesser opponents during the regular season. Their team strengths are very conducive to winning the games they should, often comfortably.

[Dr Positivity]

The thing that seems underplayed in the rebirth of this thread is the idea of the Bulls being in "playoff basketball" mode energy wise all year.

What I've never been sold on is Thibodeau's great defensive teams just coming down to a superior Xs and Os/schematic brilliance. If he was doing something a league ahead of everyone, it would be copied. I think Thibs has better schemes than say Del Negro or Paul Westphal. But better than the other "defensive coaches" like Skiles, Collins, SVG, Brown, Hollins, Spo, etc. I don't know about that. It seems like what makes the Thibs D work is what makes the other ones as well. The Bulls also just happen to have 3 elite defensive bigs (Noah/Taj/Asik) and two of the best perimeter defenders (Deng/Brewer)

I would venture the biggest difference between Rose-less Bulls in the regular season and the team that lost 4 of 5 after Rose went down to an 8th seed, is that the first games were a playoff team vs regular season teams, and the latter was playoff team vs playoff team. But it's just a guess.

[Rerisen]

I don't know about that. It seems like what makes the Thibs D work is what makes the other ones as well. The Bulls also just happen to have 3 elite defensive bigs (Noah/Taj/Asik) and two of the best perimeter defenders (Deng/Brewer)

Yes. Thibs certainly picked the right team between Chicago and New Orleans. Doc grabbed him at one point, and pointed out Rose and Noah as team leaders, and said you want these guys!

I don't think the Bulls play different on defense than many other teams (try to), but Thibs certainly is a great coach to drill them on the concepts and keep them sharp.

And Thibs did get players like Ray Allen and Pierce to buy in defensively at levels they never had prior to Boston, even if he did have KG as a mobile anchor (and now Noah in the same mold). His track record is pretty impeccable with top defensive teams wherever he's been.

Being a #2 defense starting Carlos Boozer is still a nice feat.

I would venture the biggest difference between Rose-less Bulls in the regular season and the team that lost 4 of 5 after Rose went down to an 8th seed, is that the first games were a playoff team vs regular season teams, and the latter was playoff team vs playoff team. But it's just a guess.

To the playoffs, I think people undersold Philly a little bit. No they weren't as good as their early season dominance, but also not as bad as their late season collapse (likely due to fatigue of Collins trying style). They were more in the middle, and resurged back toward that earlier level especially when they saw their chance to advance when Rose went down.

I would also note, in 2 years, Thibs defense has often fared less well against spread it around teams, with multiple dribble penetration players, where the defense can't predict who is doing most of the attacking (like Philly). Not that defense was the problem vs them at all. But it seems to do better vs superstar opponents (Kobe in the Finals for instance) as keeping the defensive 'chain' tied between players is easier when offense is predictable.

But my god was that some ugly basketball offensively between Chicago and Philly. Still, Sixers should have a puncher's chance vs Boston, who were just 27th offensively themselves this year.

[EarlTheGoat]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhwi9Q5MHvU[/youtube]

[HEAT33]

Going out in the 1st round to an 8th seed
End thread