PG: Can't stop, won't stop

[GameBredAPBT]

I can't tell if this cat is being serious or not.

[WindyCityBorn]

The Yankees, perhaps nationally, but baseball is an afterthought globally.

Not really. It's bigger than American football globally.

[ctl131]

Dude, how old are you? Michael Jordan is as synonymous with the Chicago Bulls as Kleenex are to "facial tissue". Jordan commercialized everything about the game and got it to the place it is now. FInals games JUST got to the ratings that Jordan's did almost 20 years ago.

Right now MJ is more synonymous with Haynes than he is the Bulls.

It's Hanes, man. If you're going to insist on being this wrong at least get your arguments right.

And it's Jordan brand sneakers he's known for, which he started wearing, wait for it...wait for it, when he was a member of the Chicago Bulls.

So all you can refute me with is a spelling error?

As far as Jordan wearing his own branded sneakers while he was on the Bulls; the Bulls involvement/benefit from that is totally incidental in that situation. They benefited from his massive popularity.. I don't see how you can even argue that point. The Bulls were made famous because of Jordan, not vice versa.

[Warren G]

You're putting on a Thibs level clinic of stubborn wrongness, I'm happy to let you do your thing I find it fascinating when people can't admit they're wrong.

[ctl131]

D.Rose, after one (count it) ONE successful year with the Bulls, had the #1 selling jersey worldwide (maybe it was behind Kobe in China, not sure, but he eclipsed him soon after) & landed a $300 million dollar shoe deal. After one successful year.

The NBA = The Bulls & MJ, everyone knows that.

Are you really that dense to think Derrick Rose's jersey sales were directly tied to playing for the Bulls, and not because he was a hugely talented prospect that was obviously an emerging MVP candidate? With that logic, the Bulls should have had multiple players that were near the top of jersey sales every season simply because they are that famous and important to the league.

[Warren G]

Right now MJ is more synonymous with Haynes than he is the Bulls.

It's Hanes, man. If you're going to insist on being this wrong at least get your arguments right.

And it's Jordan brand sneakers he's known for, which he started wearing, wait for it...wait for it, when he was a member of the Chicago Bulls.

So all you can refute me with is a spelling error?

As far as Jordan wearing his own branded sneakers while he was on the Bulls; the Bulls involvement/benefit from that is totally incidental in that situation. They benefited from his massive popularity.. I don't see how you can even argue that point. The Bulls were made famous because of Jordan, not vice versa.

Here's an interesting factoid:

Jordan's last two years were with the Wizards, everything he did prior to those two seasons was inextricably linked with the Chicago Bulls, because they were the only franchise he played for as he built his GOAT resume of two different three peats, the MVPS, the DPOY, scoring titles etc.

Here's another interesting factoid, nobody (not me at least) ever claimed that the Bulls made Jordan famous.

I think you think you dropped the mic just now, all I hear are crickets though.

[ctl131]

You're putting on a Thibs level clinic of stubborn wrongness, I'm happy to let you do your thing I find it fascinating when people can't admit they're wrong.

I think you're lost in a world of homerism...I don't know anyone that currently considers the Bulls the most famous franchise in the NBA, outside of the Bulls fans on this forum.

[ctl131]

It's Hanes, man. If you're going to insist on being this wrong at least get your arguments right.

And it's Jordan brand sneakers he's known for, which he started wearing, wait for it...wait for it, when he was a member of the Chicago Bulls.

So all you can refute me with is a spelling error?

As far as Jordan wearing his own branded sneakers while he was on the Bulls; the Bulls involvement/benefit from that is totally incidental in that situation. They benefited from his massive popularity.. I don't see how you can even argue that point. The Bulls were made famous because of Jordan, not vice versa.

Here's an interesting factoid:

Jordan's last two years were with the Wizards, everything he did prior to those two seasons was inextricably linked with the Chicago Bulls, because they were the only franchise he played for as he built his GOAT resume of two different three peats, the MVPS, the DPOY, scoring titles etc.

Here's another interesting factoid, nobody (not me at least) ever claimed that the Bulls made Jordan famous.

I think you think you dropped the mic just now, all I hear are crickets though.

I'm not claiming any mic drop. I'm simply saying outside of your Bulls bubble I think you'd be shocked to discover that not many people still view the franchise the way you do.

[Stratmaster]

The Bulls got 3 years of that done with one trade, meaning their process should be anywhere from 1 season to 5 seasons. If all 3 of the guys they brought in from the Butler trade turn into starting quality players (and that appears to be the direction it is going) it should be closer to one season than to 5; way closer.

If all 3 guys they got are starting level players it will definitely make a hinkie impossible, but if none are actually All-Stars it might just lock us into to another Skiles level team (not saying they can't be but so far don't see Kyrie/Draymond potential there even as #2 guys).

As if we don't get our superstar next summer, not sure how else we'd get one, seeing as how this org has not been good at luring A level Free Agents, plus nowadays you need more like 2 or 3 elite talents not just the old single star surrounded by role players model that sometimes worked.

Right now the Bulls appear to have 3 players who can consistently score at a 20 ppg level. Lavine, Niko and Lauri. In addition, on a given night Dunn could put up 20 as well. If they get an All-Star level player in free agency and a top 8 pick in this draft... and if they shed a couple of players not on that list for a 2019 first-rounder... then combine their two 2019 first-rounders to move up in the draft I see no reason to have to try to be horrible for the next four years just to take a crap shoot at a couple of number one picks.

Sent from my SM-G920V using RealGM mobile app

[Warren G]

You're putting on a Thibs level clinic of stubborn wrongness, I'm happy to let you do your thing I find it fascinating when people can't admit they're wrong.

I think you're lost in a world of homerism...I don't know anyone that currently considers the Bulls the most famous franchise in the NBA, outside of the Bulls fans on this forum.

You don't know a lot of things, it seems like.

[ctl131]

You're putting on a Thibs level clinic of stubborn wrongness, I'm happy to let you do your thing I find it fascinating when people can't admit they're wrong.

I think you're lost in a world of homerism...I don't know anyone that currently considers the Bulls the most famous franchise in the NBA, outside of the Bulls fans on this forum.

You don't know a lot of things, it seems like.

Nice comeback. Seems like I touched never with your not so famous franchise and the second best player of all time.

Stop acting like a toddler.

[jump]

I'm going to have to agree that worldwide, MJ and the Bulls are forever linked. I've seen it with my own eyes. It's not just MJ.

[Stratmaster]

Absolutely not. Lauri goes right back to the starting lineup. The goal is to develop the young core guys. If we were trying to win more games, that would be a different story. Niko will still get plenty of minutes off the bench.

Niko was named the starter before the punch. He is clearly a better player (right now) and is outplaying Lauri. I'm a huge Lauri fan and applauded the pick but I said at that time it would not be a good thing for Lauri to start. Niko is the only scorer on the team until Lavine gets back and starting Lauri does three bad things:

1. It slows his development. Becoming the main scorer immediately means we see the player Lauri is now for the rest of the season. There are few practices during the season. The ball is always coming to him and he is going to fall back on what he has learned and what he knows to date. Lauri can learn a lot on both sides of the court from watching Niko against other teams best talent.

Other than assertion, what is the basis for saying that having Lauri start slows his development? Conventional wisdom would deem the opposite to be true (like, say, Kris Dunn).

2. It puts a ton of pressure on Lauri's shoulders. We want this kid set up in a can't fail (at least can't fail too badly) situation. He is only 20 years old. He needs to build confidence and comfort evel without that pressure.

He is on a team that is comfortable tanking. This is basically the least pressure imaginable.

3. It puts heavier minutes and pressure on a kid who has never had to play 82 games in a season, or 4-5 games in a week repeatedly.

Welcome to the NBA. I don't see how coming off the bench will prevent him from hitting the rookie wall, and it's fine if he hits the rookie wall.

What happened to the "it's OK to bring these guys along slowly because we are tanking" mantra?

I do not believe this mantra exists. Who has invoked this mantra? If anything, the opposite is the mantra. Throw the young guys out there and let them play through mistakes, because we're tanking.

Lauri will still get plenty of minutes off the bench.

If having Lauri come off the bench isn't going to reduce his minutes, why are you advocating for it?

The good news is all 3 PF's are going to be forced to work on their game very diligently. They all think they are starter quality and two of them are right. They have to outplay the other 2 if they want the long term starting job; or punch them in the face if they aren't good enough to earn it.

In a tanking scenario, you do not need to award starting gigs to the player who plays best in the moment. The point is development and not wins. Now, your coach may not want to play ball with that approach, but organizationally that is what makes sense.

The only reason, IMO, to continue starting Niko is to pump up his trade value for the next month. However, if he's really enjoying himself, you risk him falling back in love with his situation in Chicago and potentially not agreeing to waive his no-trade clause. It is probably better to let him have these big games in Lauri's absence and then have him come off the bench thereafter. If he's coming off the bench, but believes he is outplaying Lauri, that may make him more willing to waive the NTC to find a better situation.

I could take most of your statements and turn them around the opposite way and ask you the same question. Conventional wisdom doesn't teach us what you say it does. Other than your assertion I'd like to understand what you are basing it on.

Obviously, coming off the bench not only takes pressure off but allows Lauri to hone his skills against a different level of player. I hate using different sports but the first analogy that comes to mind, why do even the best baseball players generally spend time in the minor leagues? There is no "second-team" equivalent for them to play against in Major League Baseball so they have to do it in the minor leagues.

I have never seen a team bench a guy who is consistently putting up 25 points per game, and playing better defense than the guy behind him. Not sure what kind of a message that sends.

Sent from my SM-G920V using RealGM mobile app

[Warren G]

I think you're lost in a world of homerism...I don't know anyone that currently considers the Bulls the most famous franchise in the NBA, outside of the Bulls fans on this forum.

You don't know a lot of things, it seems like.

Nice comeback. Seems like I touched never with your not so famous franchise and the second best player of all time.

Stop acting like a toddler.

You didn't touch a nerve*, my son. You couldn't make me mad if you tried. Namaste little one.

[GameBredAPBT]

This is ridiculous, so I'll move on. This is (hopefully) the last thing I'll contribute to this nonsensical "debate", but Derrick Rose's success had everything to do with the fact that he was drafted #1 by the Bulls. Had he been drafted by the Heat, Hornets, etc some regionally successful, irrelevant franchise, and had played as well as he did, he would have been a star no doubt, but it would have been a speck in comparison to the boom that was the Derrick Rose Bulls MVP global frenzy. Him being from here, associated with the brand, and the idea that he could be the "heir apparent" was the recipe for his success. His playing well was the other 50%. Good day.

[ctl131]

You don't know a lot of things, it seems like.

Nice comeback. Seems like I touched never with your not so famous franchise and the second best player of all time.

Stop acting like a toddler.

You didn't touch a nerve*, my son. You couldn't make me mad if you tried. Namaste little one.

Once again with the spell check. Thank god for you're editing ability!! (Get it??)

Also, I'm 30 years old, f**k off calling me little one.

[GameBredAPBT]

I'm going to have to agree that worldwide, MJ and the Bulls are forever linked. I've seen it with my own eyes. It's not just MJ.

It isn't even an opinion, everyone knows that. Not only MJ = The Bulls, the NBA = The Bulls. Anyone who has lived or traveled abroad can attest to that.

[ctl131]

This is ridiculous, so I'll move on. This is (hopefully) the last thing I'll contribute to this nonsensical "debate", but Derrick Rose's success had everything to do with the fact that he was drafted #1 by the Bulls. Had he been drafted by the Heat, Hornets, etc some regionally successful, irrelevant franchise, and had played as well as he did, he would have been a star no doubt, but it would have been a speck in comparison to the boom that was the Derrick Rose Bulls MVP global frenzy. Him being from here, associated with the brand, and the idea that he could be the "heir apparent" was the recipe for his success. His playing well was the other 50%. Good day.

Says someone who is so deeply entrenched in Bulls fandom they think the sky is red.

Good day.

[Stratmaster]

This is ridiculous, so I'll move on. This is (hopefully) the last thing I'll contribute to this nonsensical "debate", but Derrick Rose's success had everything to do with the fact that he was drafted #1 by the Bulls. Had he been drafted by the Heat, Hornets, etc some regionally successful, irrelevant franchise, and had played as well as he did, he would have been a star no doubt, but it would have been a speck in comparison to the boom that was the Derrick Rose Bulls MVP global frenzy. Him being from here, associated with the brand, and the idea that he could be the "heir apparent" was the recipe for his success. His playing well was the other 50%. Good day.

Yes I agree this is "truth"

Sent from my SM-G920V using RealGM mobile app

[ctl131]

I'm going to have to agree that worldwide, MJ and the Bulls are forever linked. I've seen it with my own eyes. It's not just MJ.

It isn't even an opinion, everyone knows that. Not only MJ = The Bulls, the NBA = The Bulls. Anyone who has lived or traveled abroad can attest to that.

I was over in England 2 years ago, lots of NBA fans, not one even mentioned the Bulls.