Okay, six games later... Is Big Ben rejuvinated?

[eNgIeS]

I really can't believe some people are still complaining about Wallace. Which part of THIS, energetic, giving-a-damn Wallace, didn't we know about? That he'd decline slightly? We knew that. That he was the worst offensive bigman in the league garnering his minutes? We knew that. For the past 6 games, Wallace has been playing AS ADVERTISED. You can't ask any more from him. If you have a problem with his minutes, complain about the coaching, not Wallace. He won the game tonight.

Well said sick of the negative suposed "fans" come here with there whinging. This forum was so much better at one time now all ppl do is complain even if we do win and and the fact we only JUST lost in OT and DOublt OT otherwise we would be 6-0 under boylan

[Mr. Tibbs]

i'd say i'm guilty of complaining about wallace but i like to think i call out the coaching more than wallace. however i will continue to rag on wallace for the things that he should be able to figure out. Like say...how to dunk the ball rather than lay the ball up and get nothing but backboard. I don't think asking him to either dunk the ball...or not shoot is asking too much? Instead when he shoots those fadeaways or ulcer inducing floaters...i feel validated in a little complaint.

[derf]

Ben Wallace is playing markedly better under Boylan than Skiles. That's a good thing.

I argued for a long time that BW was playing hurt. I . rethought that position after Boylan singled him out as a player he had "called in", and "explained his expectations" to.

A. If it was the ankle then we have an older version of the former DPOY and we should play him heavy minutes (just not on offense at the end of close games). That Ben Wallace even with his offensive warts can take us deep into the playoffs.

B. If it was an attitude problem (toward SS), it is only a matter of time before he and Boylan butt heads (if you believe in the Kelly Dwyer analysis, eventually Ben has a problem with all coaches). In that case he should be dealt ASAP.

I don't think his physical gifts have declined all that much, I think it' either A or B.

[dougthonus]

I think it's likely a combination of A and B and the following which I'll term C:

Ben Wallace is really best suited to play on a team with 4 extremely good to great offensive options on it and was probably a bit overrated there.

When you look at the Pistons, Billups, Hamilton, Prince, and Wallace have an incredibly wide array of ways to score on the court. Getting offense out of Ben Wallace isn't even mildly important for that team.

Wallace's physical skills have definitely also declined. We're talking about a player who's very short for his position and probably gives up 3 inches to the typical guy he has to guard. He really needs good lift to get away from that, and it seems like he doesn't have it anymore. He's still a smart defender and strong as an ox, but he doesn't have the same quickness or lift and that hurts his game as well.

Either way, I'd say Wallace, under Boylan, has moved up from worst big man on the team to at least equal to our other big men in the gian scrum of mediocre front court talent.

[coldfish]

I really can't believe some people are still complaining about Wallace. Which part of THIS, energetic, giving-a-damn Wallace, didn't we know about? That he'd decline slightly? We knew that. That he was the worst offensive bigman in the league garnering his minutes? We knew that. For the past 6 games, Wallace has been playing AS ADVERTISED. You can't ask any more from him. If you have a problem with his minutes, complain about the coaching, not Wallace. He won the game tonight.

Last 6 games
11.2 rpg, 2.33 apg, 2.5 bpg, 1.7 spg, 5.3 ppg 34% 39.2mpg

Last 82 games in Detroit
11.3rpg 1.9a 2.2blk 1.8s 7.3p 53%fg 35.2mpg

Basically, Wallace's raw numbers are slightly worse than in last year in Detroit. When you consider that he is putting them up in more minutes playing at a faster pace, its not a small drop. That being said, when you sign a 32 year old player, you have to expect a drop off.

In summary, I think you are right that he is playing right now as could be reasonably expected when he was signed and I give credit to Wallace for that.

[molepharmer]

In general, Ben's season has been in spurts.

Games 1 - 6: injured, poor play
Games 7 - 14: good play
Game 15: 48 min fiasco
Games 16 - 26: inconsistent, more poor than good but missed games 23 & 24 due to bad back; Was he playing injured during this streak ????
Games 27 - 32: under Boylan, slightly improved play

Based on this, I'd say Ben is going to enter into a period of poor play within the next couple of games that will probably last for about a 5-7 game stretch.

[dougthonus]

In summary, I think you are right that he is playing right now as could be reasonably expected when he was signed and I give credit to Wallace for that.

On defense.

If he was just able to convert his offensive opportunities at that same 50% clip, he would no longer be a massive liability. This is a guy who's EFG% on "close" shots is .306. That's just horrible.

[coldfish]

In summary, I think you are right that he is playing right now as could be reasonably expected when he was signed and I give credit to Wallace for that.

On defense.

If he was just able to convert his offensive opportunities at that same 50% clip, he would no longer be a massive liability. This is a guy who's EFG% on "close" shots is .306. That's just horrible.

I think you covered it somewhere else. Wallace is undersized. When you combine that with his lack of offensive skill, he needs to use his athleticism to score and obviously that's going to decline as he gets older.

Beyond that, Detroit used Wallace differently than Chicago is. Flip only let Wallace get the ball on offensive rebounds or wide open layups. The Bulls actually run the offense through him, which gives him a lot more contested shots than he got in Detroit.

In summary, I think his FG% going down to abysmal levels, in hindsight, could have been reasonably expected given his skills and utilization by Chicago.

Note: I am not saying that Wallace is good. Quite frankly, I think Noah would eat him alive if consistently given 30+ minutes per game, but that's another discussion.

[ozbull]

Its obvious he's not the same player...but we simply cant do anything without him.

Lets hope this little streak of above average (below his average) play continues and we can get something for him.

[DuckIII]

Might I just add that Wallace's man has routinely been going off on us lately, especially worrying are the big rebounding games guys have against him.

Brad Miller 22 and 13
LaMarcus Aldridge 14 and 13
Emeka Okafor 9 and 8
Dwight Howard 17 and 22
Zach Randolph 18 and 12 (Eddy Curry 12 and 8 in 21 min)
Andrew Bogut 15 and 11

What were their field goal percentages? Those type of raw statistics paint a terrible picture of how well Wallace played in those games. For example, I'd argue that Ben Wallace's best defensive game of the entire year ended with a boxscore in which Dwight Howard still went for 17/22. His man defense on Howard was textbook, holding Howard to a fg% that was basically half of his average. Out of all those games, the only player who Wallace really had trouble with was Brad Miller, who had an excellent game.

Despite that, Wallace still had a nice game against Sacto and made some key plays himself.

Randolph - 8/23
Okafor - 4/11
Howard - 4/11
Aldridge - 6/17

Wallace played excellent defense in all of those games except the Sacto game. And his defense didn't suck in that game either, chalk that up in part to Miller having a nice game - which is going to happen.

There is no doubt that he's "back". In fact, I don't even think that is the right word. I think Wallace is playing better and more consistent basketball, with more enthusiasm, right now than he ever has as a Bull. Outside of the Miami series, this is the only time that I've looked at him and his demeanor and the demeanor of the team towards him, and felt like he was really an integrated part of the roster.

The question isn't whether he's playing effective basketball right now. The question is whether or not he'll keep it up. And my biggest fear right now is that he won't and that when he starts to fade, Boylan will be too slow to inject healthy doses of Noah and Thomas into his place.

[DuckIII]

-= original quote snipped =-



Well said sick of the negative suposed "fans" come here with there whinging. This forum was so much better at one time now all ppl do is complain even if we do win and and the fact we only JUST lost in OT and DOublt OT otherwise we would be 6-0 under boylan

I've been battling a number of my absolute favorite posters over the Wallace issue in the Jim Boylan era. In my opinion, his minutes are consistent with his production and I'm pleased with his recent play. But I think its very unfair to call those with lingering complaints about Wallace and playing time "supposed" fans. Though I think they are wronger than Wrongy Wronginson, the reason they complain is because they think not playing him will improve the team. Fans are supposed to advocate what they think will improve the team.

[coldfish]

Wallace played excellent defense in all of those games except the Sacto game. And his defense didn't suck in that game either, chalk that up in part to Miller having a nice game - which is going to happen.

In the Portland game, Aldridge just missed wide open shots to start the game and later he started hitting them. Wallace was rarely near him.

There is no doubt that he's "back". In fact, I don't even think that is the right word. I think Wallace is playing better and more consistent basketball right now than he ever has as a Bull.

His 9 game period in December 2006 was far better. Check from 12-02 to 12-16. That was right after Sam Smith called him out in the paper. Wallace was all over the place and dominating people. Not coincidentally, the Bulls won 8 of 9.

http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/ ... &year=2007

The question isn't whether he's playing effective basketball right now. To argue against it is pretty darn absurd in my opinion. The question is whether or not he'll keep it up. And my biggest fear right now is that he won't. And when he starts to fade, Boylan will be too slow to inject healthy doses of Noah and Thomas into his place.

A guy playing some of the worst offense in the NBA surely can have his effectiveness questioned. It is half the game.

See above. Sure those guys shot low percentages, but Wallace shot lower. Wallace's direct counterparts over this period of games has outproduced him by a ton. That's a deficit the rest of the team has to make up. I don't see how questioning a guy who is beaten night in and night out is absurd.

[coldfish]

-= original quote snipped =-



I've been battling a number of my absolute favorite posters over the Wallace issue in the Jim Boylan era. In my opinion, his minutes are consistent with his production and I'm pleased with his recent play. But I think its very unfair to call those with lingering complaints about Wallace and playing time "supposed" fans. Though I think they are wronger than Wrongy Wronginson, the reason they complain is because they think not playing him will improve the team. Fans are supposed to advocate what they think will improve the team.

I agree that its just a difference of opinion. If anything, I could spin engies as the negative one.

Its my belief that the team is much better than it is playing right now. Does that make me a "supposed" fan?

.....

Last note and I can't overstress this. I have great difficulty separating my dislike for Wallace versus my hatred for how he is used. I think its a perfectly reasonable case to make that Wallace would help the team much more if his role was changed, particularly on offense.

When you have announcers, even home announcers, questioning how Wallace is utilized, you have an issue.

[DuckIII]

See above. Sure those guys shot low percentages, but Wallace shot lower. Wallace's direct counterparts over this period of games has outproduced him by a ton. That's a deficit the rest of the team has to make up. I don't see how questioning a guy who is beaten night in and night out is absurd.

Wallace shot a lower percentage on how many shots? I'd wager that Ben Wallace has probably been offensively "outproduced" season in and season out his entire career. Even when he was earning DPOY every year and playing in allstar games. Its an oversimplified analysis that doesn't encompass the impact he has on games when he's playing well.

If he were a critical component of the offense, it would matter. But when Hinrich/Gordon/Smith-Chapu/Deng are out there with him, he's buttressed by 4 scorers. Its an issue, but it doesn't even sniff the significance you attach to it.

Under Boylan, with Wallace being "outproduced" by his assignment (ignoring the gross ineffenciency of that production) the Bulls are averaging 104 ppg on roughly 44 fg%. He's not a drain on the offense because he's a small part of it. Randolph shooting 8/23 or Aldridge shooting 6/17 - that is a drain on offensive production.

Not to mention the hard-to-quantif offensive positives Ben Wallace provides with tipped boards, poke away steals, and blocks that lead to easier opportunities or the extra possessions he provides by being the #3 offensive rebounder in the entire NBA.

[TB#1]

OK. Here we go again. Ben Wallace with the ball in his hands in the final seconds of a nail-biter. It worked last night against a severely shorthanded Kings team, but it isn't exactly where I want to put my money long term. I've been complaining about this since the Boylan era began and it continues game after game.

The Bulls are even joking about it, but I just don't think it is funny.

Again, he did a nice job on Miller on the other end, but on the offensive end he should not have been in there with the clock winding down.

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com ... -headlines

Wallace stars as finisher in Bulls victory over Kings

By K.C. Johnson
Tribune staff reporter

January 6, 2008, 12:15 AM CST

After the drama of the Bulls' 94-93 victory over the Kings ended Saturday night, the comedy began.

"I don't know if I could've taken another overtime game, so I'm glad I sent my best free-throw shooter to the line and he came through," interim coach Jim Boylan said.

The rim shot for Boylan, now 4-2, was optional.

Ben Wallace, he of the 47.6 percent free-throw shooting, certainly didn't need one, swishing home the winning free throw with 3.2 seconds remaining for his only point.

They won it on a nifty inbounds play in which Kirk Hinrich executed a give-and-go with Wallace, whose 11 rebounds gave him his sixth straight double-digit game since Boylan took over.

Rather than guard Hinrich as he inbounded the ball, the Kings double-teamed and took away Ben Gordon, who scored 20 and was the Bulls' first option. Hinrich found Wallace, who then handed the ball back to Hinrich. Seeing an opening, Hinrich drove the baseline and was double-teamed. So he kicked it to a cutting Wallace, who almost made the shot while Mikki Moore fouled him.

"When we were diagramming it in the timeout, we told Kirk to look for that," Boylan said. "Kirk did a nice job driving and drew the defender. It's a little dangerous and it did kind of bite them a little bit when you take a guy off whoever is taking the ball out of bounds."

But the Kings, led by Miller's 22 points and 13 rebounds, didn't go away. Miller's two free throws with 63 seconds left tied the game, setting up Wallace's heroics.

"I just do what I do," Wallace said. "Somebody has to be the hero. Why not me?"

[BuLLzDoMaIn]

Might I just add that Wallace's man has routinely been going off on us lately, especially worrying are the big rebounding games guys have against him.

Brad Miller 22 and 13
LaMarcus Aldridge 14 and 13
Emeka Okafor 9 and 8
Dwight Howard 17 and 22
Zach Randolph 18 and 12 (Eddy Curry 12 and 8 in 21 min)
Andrew Bogut 15 and 11

yeah but only two of those guys really play in the post and thats dwight and okafor.. Dwight is just a monster idc no one can stop him.. and okafor only getting 8 and 9 is pretty good.. those other guys make jumpshots and wallace doesnt always come out to defend fully

[TB#1]

Ben is even starting to analyze his FTs and explain why they aren't going in. Interesting.

http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=108048

Wallace started the night shooting a career-high 50.9 percent from the foul line this season. But the game-winner was his only make out of 6 attempts on Friday.

"I was having a little back spasm and couldn't (bend) down as low as I wanted to get down on the free-throw line tonight," he said. "When it counted, I was able to get under it and make one for the team."

[DuckIII]

TB, I'd like to think having Wallace on floor on the last offensive possession is a mistake that Boylan won't repeat again, being that it lead to gut-wrenching reliance on his free throw shooting ability.

We'll see. I was stunned when Boylan ran Wallace out there for that possession knowing that Sacto had a time out that they would most certainly use if the Bulls scored, which would enable putting Wallace back in for the final defensive stand.

[TB#1]

TB, I'd like to think having Wallace on floor on the last offensive possession is a mistake that Boylan won't repeat again, being that it lead to gut-wrenching reliance on his free throw shooting ability.

We'll see. I was stunned when Boylan ran Wallace out there for that possession knowing that Sacto had a time out that they would most certainly use if the Bulls scored, which would enable putting Wallace back in for the final defensive stand.

I hope you are right. I've hoped for that after every game they've left him in like that, though, and they keep on doing it.

[coldfish]

Wallace shot a lower percentage on how many shots? I'd wager that Ben Wallace has probably been offensively "outproduced" season in and season out his entire career. Even when he was earning DPOY every year and playing in allstar games. Its an oversimplified analysis that doesn't encompass the impact he has on games when he's playing well.

The Pistons constantly had a positive PER differential at the center position when Wallace was there. Strictly point wise, you are right that Wallace got outproduced.

However, all of the things that you discuss in general about Wallace (good defense, dominating the boards, tips, etc.) used to show up in overall production. It no longer does. The Bulls are negative at the center position right now.

If he were a critical component of the offense, it would matter. But when Hinrich/Gordon/Smith-Chapu/Deng are out there with him, he's buttressed by 4 scorers. Its an issue, but it doesn't even sniff the significance you attach to it.

Under Boylan, with Wallace being "outproduced" by his assignment (ignoring the gross ineffenciency of that production) the Bulls are averaging 104 ppg on roughly 44 fg%. He's not a drain on the offense because he's a small part of it. Randolph shooting 8/23 or Aldridge shooting 6/17 - that is a drain on offensive production.

This is the biggest rub I have about Wallace. Offense is a 5 man game, just like defense. The Wallace high pick and roll is the perfect example of it. When Wallace is the picker, it leads to numerous turnovers and few points. Those numbers don't usually hit Wallace directly, but count against the other guys trying to make up for the fact that Wallace doesn't help and isn't being guarded.

When the Bulls run that same play with Joe Smith, they get a ton of high percentage looks.

Wallace's poor offensive play is more than just his stats. It becomes a negative intangible, just like his tipped passes on defense is a positive intangible.

Not to mention the hard-to-quantif offensive positives Ben Wallace provides with tipped boards, poke away steals, and blocks that lead to easier opportunities or the extra possessions he provides by being the #3 offensive rebounder in the entire NBA.

I'll give you your intangible if you give me mine.