MGB8 wrote:I actually wouldn't be surprised if the Bulls did look better in the short term without Zach.
Other people have mentioned that having key guys out sometimes gets other guys to play harder. Given that the Bulls effort is in serious question, I wouldn't be shocked to see that kind of effect.
At the same time, I also wouldn't be shocked to see some of the seemingly soft and entitlement minded Bulls players continue with their soft play.
Losing a key guy should stir stronger effort from everyone else unless the team has already folded on the season and the coach. Playing harder may not yield a better result, but you should get an uptick in effort, sometimes that will give an uptick in result.
It also may be the case that guys that normally don't get nearly as many shots now get a lot more opportunity and with that, gain confidence to have better nights.
Finally, the opposing defense has a lot less of an idea of what the Bulls are going to do, because Zach is usually a huge portion of the offense. They'll be defending lesser players, but there will be more element of surprise. What happens when Pat Williams shoots 18 times in a game? Who knows?
So sometimes there is enough going on to give a team missing a key guy a short term boost. Sometimes a guy isn't actually as key as you think, and as soon as he's gone you realize he's holding others back. Any of those things are possible, but Zach's overall efficiency and volume make me think its unlikely the team can play better without him for any extended period of time.
