Starting Hinrich over Dunleavy in a Bogans role

[mj234eva]

FYI, Jimmy shot 35.4% from 3 in December, and is at 36.1% in January. After shooting 30.8% in October. But why you "attacking him." You're just a Jimmy hater!

No, a player hater is someone who can't see the positives a player brings and only sees the negatives. A fanboy is someone who only sees the positives, and either doesn't see or makes excuses for the negatives. In both cases they overreact to every missed or made shot the player takes. In most cases they only pay attention to offense.

I am neither a fanboy or a hater of either Butler or Hinrich.

Jimmy, to his credit, doesn't take any volume of 3's. His overall shooting and scoring are inconsistent.

One out of two ain't bad.

Also, it was a joke.

[Stratmaster]

Cool, but the defense doesn't care if he's the 3rd biggest threat, because he's not consistent enough, which is what AirGordon was getting at. You want to keep talking in circles?

If what you are trying to say is that the Bulls need better 3 point shooting, because with MDJ out teams don;t respect their perimeter shooters, I agree with you a million percent. To blame that on the 2nd string combo Gaurd who happens to also be the 3rd best 3-point shooter is stupid.

Point out to me where I blamed Kirk. You're having an argument with me, that I'm not even having with you apparently.

No, you appear to just want to argue. The conversation was about posts AirGordon made. you then stepped in and made two posts telling me "what he meant". So I have to assume you are defending HIS position, since you have stated no position of your own.

[Stratmaster]

FYI, Jimmy shot 35.4% from 3 in December, and is at 36.1% in January. After shooting 30.8% in October. But why you "attacking him." You're just a Jimmy hater!

No, a player hater is someone who can't see the positives a player brings and only sees the negatives. A fanboy is someone who only sees the positives, and either doesn't see or makes excuses for the negatives. In both cases they overreact to every missed or made shot the player takes. In most cases they only pay attention to offense.

I am neither a fanboy or a hater of either Butler or Hinrich.

Jimmy, to his credit, doesn't take any volume of 3's. His overall shooting and scoring are inconsistent.

One out of two ain't bad.

Also, it was a joke.

It's all good. I took it as a joke, but it did bring to mind many of the Hinrich detractors, so I figured I would get my definition stated.

[mj234eva]

If what you are trying to say is that the Bulls need better 3 point shooting, because with MDJ out teams don;t respect their perimeter shooters, I agree with you a million percent. To blame that on the 2nd string combo Gaurd who happens to also be the 3rd best 3-point shooter is stupid.

Point out to me where I blamed Kirk. You're having an argument with me, that I'm not even having with you apparently.

No, you appear to just want to argue. The conversation was about posts AirGordon made. you then stepped in and made two posts telling me "what he meant". So I have to assume you are defending HIS position, since you have stated no position of your own.

Actually I have. And his opinion was that Kirk wasn't a consistent enough threat from 3 to warrant starting instead of Dunleavy (spacing issues). Which you have yet to refute. Like I said, talking in circles.

[Stratmaster]

Point out to me where I blamed Kirk. You're having an argument with me, that I'm not even having with you apparently.

No, you appear to just want to argue. The conversation was about posts AirGordon made. you then stepped in and made two posts telling me "what he meant". So I have to assume you are defending HIS position, since you have stated no position of your own.

Actually I have. And his opinion was that Kirk wasn't a consistent enough threat from 3 to warrant starting instead of Dunleavy. Which you have yet to refute. Like I said, talking in circles.

And...I never said he was. I said that it would improve the defense and would also allow MDJ to become more of a scorer with the 2nd unit. that was also in response to the OP from Rerisen, who I have had numerous conversations about MDJ's role and who has an issue with his low volume, and I acknowledged that could resolve his issue with MDJ's "role" as a low volume member of the starting 5. Which you have yet to refute. Like I said, talking in circles..it takes 2.

[mj234eva]

No, you appear to just want to argue. The conversation was about posts AirGordon made. you then stepped in and made two posts telling me "what he meant". So I have to assume you are defending HIS position, since you have stated no position of your own.

Actually I have. And his opinion was that Kirk wasn't a consistent enough threat from 3 to warrant starting instead of Dunleavy. Which you have yet to refute. Like I said, talking in circles.

And...I never said he was.

My back and forth had to do with your disagreement with user AirGordon, on Kirk being an inconsistent shooter, and not a good floor spacer for the starting lineup.

Hinrich starting does not fix our defense and makes us worse on offense

no spacing and Jimmy seems to be alot more effective at SG than SF so that hurts us in 2 areas to start the game...not good

counting on Hinrich to hit 3's consistently is spitting in the wind

Well...I would agree except for the facts. The facts which show that at 36.4% Hinrich is the 3rd best 3-point shooter on the team.

So, you're saying you really didn't disagree with AirGordon now? So, you agree that Kirk isn't much a floor spacer and is not a consistent enough threat from 3?

I said that it would improve the defense and would also allow MDJ to become more of a scorer with the 2nd unit. that was also in response to the OP from Rerisen, who I have had numerous conversations about MDJ's role and who has an issue with his low volume, and I acknowledged that could resolve his issue with MDJ's "role" as a low volume member of the starting 5. Which you have yet to refute.

I didn't argue against your point, here. Thus, no need to refute what you stated.

[Stratmaster]

Actually I have. And his opinion was that Kirk wasn't a consistent enough threat from 3 to warrant starting instead of Dunleavy. Which you have yet to refute. Like I said, talking in circles.

And...I never said he was.

My back and forth had to do with your disagreement with user AirGordon, on Kirk being an inconsistent shooter, and not a good floor spacer for the starting lineup.

Hinrich starting does not fix our defense and makes us worse on offense

no spacing and Jimmy seems to be alot more effective at SG than SF so that hurts us in 2 areas to start the game...not good

counting on Hinrich to hit 3's consistently is spitting in the wind

Well...I would agree except for the facts. The facts which show that at 36.4% Hinrich is the 3rd best 3-point shooter on the team.

So, you're saying you really didn't disagree with AirGordon now? So, you agree that Kirk isn't much a floor spacer and is not a consistent enough threat from 3?

I said that it would improve the defense and would also allow MDJ to become more of a scorer with the 2nd unit. that was also in response to the OP from Rerisen, who I have had numerous conversations about MDJ's role and who has an issue with his low volume, and I acknowledged that could resolve his issue with MDJ's "role" as a low volume member of the starting 5. Which you have yet to refute.

I didn't argue against your point, here. Thus, no need to refute what you stated.

Kirk is the next best floor spacer available compared to MDJ. So yes, I disagree. And yes, next to MDJ he is the most consistent 3 point shooter the Bulls have. So yes, I disagree with that as well. And it would improve the starting defense and allow MDJ to take on more of a scorer's role off the bench.

However, if you interpreted my response to be a gung-ho endorsement of starting Hinrich then I apologize for not being clear. Go back and read my original response again and I will do the same. Because it was more of a shrug of the shoulders and was considering more the idea of MDJ coming off the bench.

So, to summarize: 3 point shooters are generally inconsistent. Next to MDJ and Brooks, hinrich is the best 3 point shooter the Bulls have. I don't believe he is as good as MDJ at spacing the floor or 3 point shooting. However, right now the Bulls can;t stop anyone, and have no fire and intensity. The thought of starting Hinrich in a Bogans role as he actually works hard on the court and knows how to defend a simple pick and roll does not bother me at all, nor do I think it would be a magic fix to all of the Bulls problems..

[mj234eva]

Brooks has been the most consistent 3 point shooter of any Bull, this season. More consistent than Dunleavy. In his worst month, he shot 39.5%. This isn't an argument for him as a floor spacer in the starting lineup, however.

And I think you think that floor spacing is closely tied to a players 3 point %, career or current. It is not. For example, Mirotic is a better floor spacer than Kirk (and Snell), not because of what his current % is from there, but in how he is guarded when out beyond the 3 point line. Yet, he currently has a lower 3P% than both.

It's how the defense sees you. If they fear your shot, they do not want to leave you open. Kyle comes to mind. Bogans, does not. Even though, in 10-11 Kyle shot 41.5% from 3, and Bogans wasn't far off at 40.4%. If teams guarded Kyle the way they guarded Bogans, that season, Kyle might have shot 50+% from 3.

[Rerisen]

One thing is obvious from a game like last night. Hinrich has to score the damn ball - at least a little.

He can't play 27 minutes and score 0 points and miss every shot. Even if its 4 or 5 shots. That his offense doesn't matter is a ridiculous argument. We wouldn't play any opponent who did that and talk after the game about how much the guy hurt us who didn't score. Unless it was some defensive anchor beast like Gobert or something (and he even hurt us on offense too).

If Kirk scores just 8-10 points in that many minutes and keeps teams honest with his 3PT% he can be a useful player for us. But if he is missing everything, he is vast majority of the time, going to be a negative.

[musiqsoulchild]

One thing is obvious from a game like last night. Hinrich has to score the damn ball - at least a little.

He can't play 27 minutes and score 0 points and miss every shot. Even if its 4 or 5 shots. That his offense doesn't matter is a ridiculous argument. We wouldn't play any opponent who did that and talk after the game about how much the guy hurt us who didn't score. Unless it was some defensive anchor beast like Gobert or something (and he even hurt us on offense too).

If Kirk scores just 8-10 points in that many minutes and keeps teams honest with his 3PT% he can be a useful player for us. But if he is missing everything, he is vast majority of the time, going to be a negative.

Yeah...pretty much on point.

Thats the problem with 3 point heavy mix of shots though. When they go in, everything is dandy. When they dont, everything is crud.

[Rerisen]

Everyone talks about defense being our big problem (and its the bigger problem) but offense is not all peaches and cream either.

Last night we lost the 1st quarter on offense. Only 19 points vs a mediocre Cleveland defense. That's because Hinrich contributed nothing and our top 3 guys were like 2-12 or something pathetic. We've just got to get some scoring support from other players in the lineup beside our top 3 options.

And most nights, Jo offers little to nothing, and even the great Dunleavy will commonly struggle to add more than 6 points through a whole game. Dunleavy has scored 6 or less in 15 out of 33 games. Almost 50% of the time!

The issue here is our release valve offensive players: Brooks and Mirotic, are incredibly hard to ramp up minutes for on any given night due to their positions duplicate our strongest talent.

If we had another high scoring wing it would be cake to use this player more when we needed more offensive help, or to replace a bad night from Pau, Rose or Butler.

I guess the FO thought McDermott might be that guy, but it was a heck of a gamble to count on a rookie for that.