GetBuLLish wrote:bullsnewdynasty wrote:GetBuLLish wrote:Don't really care for this loss. Happens when you're short handed. Only thing a game like this is good for is to expose the idiocy of any argument that this team is better without Rose or has more "energy" without him.
Straw man, the argument was that the Bulls play harder without Rose. The Bulls played hard tonight, they just didn't have enough for the win. Had nothing to do with lack of effort.
I would bet every penny to my name that if Rose played last night and the Bulls lost just like they did last night, there would be a 20+ page PG thread with everyone screaming that the Bulls lacked effort due to Rose and that's why they lost.
This "play harder" meme is simply a mechanism for people to criticize Rose when they know they don't have any actual facts to back up the criticism.
The Bulls don't "play harder" without Rose. However,they definitely do lose more often without him.
Also,
in their last 6 games without Rose, Bulls are scoring 92.8 points per game, over 8 points less than their season average.
They are allowing 2 points less per game though.
Averaging about 2 fewer possessions per game. Their defensive rating during this stretch is, 103.3. Their offensive rating is a putrid 98.9. Through Feb 23rd, they had a defensive rating of 101.6, and an offensive rating of 105.4.
And as an aside, in the 8 Feb games w/Rose, the Bulls had an OffRtg of 106.5 and a DefRtg of 96.8, net of +9.7. Things were looking up.