|
On June 17 2009 11:23 Xeris wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2009 10:09 iLoveKT wrote:
bulls 09-10 champs! you heard it here first.
seriously though, Derrick Rose will break out next season. A decent trade or 2 for a big man and Chicago is set. he already broke out this season  but yes I am really hoping they go far in the playoffs. they're my 2nd favorite team. Chicago has some serious problems though if they want to be a serious contender Starting 5: PG - Derrick Rose SG - Ben Gordon SF - Deng PF - Thomas C - Noah Bench: PG - Hinrich SG - Salmons SF - ?? PF - Tim Thomas C - Miller Alright. First of all, Chicago needs a strong Center. Secondly, they can't be very successful if Ben Gordon is their highets scorer. Ben Gordon's ideal role is as a 6th man, playing a Ginobli type role. Having someone who can give you 25 points on any given night off the bench is DANGEROUS. Joakim Noah isn't an NBA starter. He's one of those "energy" guys who is great coming off the bench to give you ~10 boards and a block or 2. Hinrich is an amazing backup PG, and Gordon would be a strong backup 2, Noah a backup center. They really need an elite scorer and strong center before they can be a real contender in the East. Right now Chicago has a few great pieces, but mostly the makings of the best bench in the NBA (Hinrich, Gordon, Noah). If they build a strong group of starters around a nucleus of Rose and Deng they can become pretty powerful. I don't think the Bulls will have much of a chance to bring back Gordon. He's going to get a ton of money from some team out there, and the Bull's really shouldn't try to match it. He's really not worth as much as he's most likely going to get.
I'd much rather they keep Hinrich and keep the cap space for 2010. It's too bad the Bulls sank so much money into signing Deng, they'd have a much better shot at keeping Gordon if that wasn't the case. All we can do is hope Deng starts to perform better, and Rose keeps improving.
Oh yeah, not a single person on the bulls knows how to play defense, nor does the coach have any interest in playing defense, that's also a problem.
|
^^agreed with this post except the defense part: Hinrich and Rose are decent. They just get rocked because when Ben Gordon is in the game they have to gamble too much so it makes them look even worse. Of course John Salmons isn't a terrible defender either.
|
On June 18 2009 08:30 Ace wrote:
^^agreed with this post except the defense part: Hinrich and Rose are decent. They just get rocked because when Ben Gordon is in the game they have to gamble too much so it makes them look even worse. Of course John Salmons isn't a terrible defender either.
Yeah that was an overstatement. Salmons and Hinrich can be good. And Rose has only been around a year so there's still hope there.
The bigger problem is Vinny Del Negro.
|
United States4471 Posts
I think letting Ben Gordon go could actually turn out to be a good thing for Chicago. I see him as "fool's gold" that will be overpaid by a team that will learn to regret it.
Hinrich is too good and too expensive to keep around as a backup PG, and he's not big enough to pair up with Rose as a SG. It's a shame because his defense is great and the team needs it bad, but I think money will come into play here and you'll see Hinrich get picked off by another team.
A Rose/Salmons backcourt isn't bad, but it's not great either. I see Salmons as more of a SF than a SG, but they'll need him to play SG if both Gordon and Hinrich leave.
It'll be interesting to see how Deng performs next season. He was a very promising player prior to last year, and there's really no reason why he can't pick up right where he left off. Solid defender, great mid-range game, and well-rounded otherwise. You could do a lot worse for your starting SF.
I think Tyrus and Noah are too erratic to rely on, and having them as your starting frontline is trouble. Brad isn't anything more than a stopgap solution, the Bulls can't possibly be seeing him in their future. Chicago needs to get some solid post players or they'll never be a serious threat to any of the contenders. Keep in mind that Boston didn't have KG or Powe in that series, and the Bulls didn't exactly dominate them in the paint.
In my opinion, the Bulls are a team comprised of parts that don't match, and a roster filled with holes. They relied heavily on Gordon in the playoffs, but he's just a pure scorer and not the type of player you want to rely on to get you to the next level. Hinrich is a quality guard, but he's not Allstar material either. Rose and Deng may be the Bulls' best hopes, but Deng is a bit of a question mark after last season. The frontcourt, as I said above, is a major weakness for them and they still lack anyone who can consistently get them easy buckets in the paint. The team has talent, but it's going to take some major overhauling to turn them into a contender in my opinion.
|
I think you pretty much hit the nail on the head Cyric. I guess I'll be a bit simpler and harsher. The Bulls aren't going anywhere with their current lineup :D
|
On June 18 2009 00:25 MYM.Testie wrote:Seeing as you're asking, here you go. It means you're so homo for the lakers that it is extremely obnoxious. It means reading your posts is often like poison to the other forumgoers eyes. It means your clear bias is sickening. The very post before this one, is extremely obnoxious. It was TheMusic that said that about you. TheMusic is a cool guy. His word is legit. Basically: Your word cannot be trusted on anything Laker / Kobe related because you have a poster of Kobe on your ceiling that has gotten much use. Examples below: Ace: A healthy fan of the Celtics. Like's it when they win and cheers for them. Comes off as a fan and not obnoxious. When talking about his team, you could trust his words and judgment. Xeris: Gives the impression that he would really like to be in the locker room of the Lakers just to see naked Kobe and or get tag teamed by the entire Lakers team. Infested: Creepy Utah dude.  lol
Definition of a hater.
|
I wonder if next season sun yue can get more playing time during the regular season, i mean he seems pretty decent and quick for a big guy like him. hopefully jackson will play him
|
Phil Jackson's gf
Jeannie Buss
|
On June 18 2009 10:31 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
I think letting Ben Gordon go could actually turn out to be a good thing for Chicago. I see him as "fool's gold" that will be overpaid by a team that will learn to regret it.
Hinrich is too good and too expensive to keep around as a backup PG, and he's not big enough to pair up with Rose as a SG. It's a shame because his defense is great and the team needs it bad, but I think money will come into play here and you'll see Hinrich get picked off by another team.
A Rose/Salmons backcourt isn't bad, but it's not great either. I see Salmons as more of a SF than a SG, but they'll need him to play SG if both Gordon and Hinrich leave.
It'll be interesting to see how Deng performs next season. He was a very promising player prior to last year, and there's really no reason why he can't pick up right where he left off. Solid defender, great mid-range game, and well-rounded otherwise. You could do a lot worse for your starting SF.
I think Tyrus and Noah are too erratic to rely on, and having them as your starting frontline is trouble. Brad isn't anything more than a stopgap solution, the Bulls can't possibly be seeing him in their future. Chicago needs to get some solid post players or they'll never be a serious threat to any of the contenders. Keep in mind that Boston didn't have KG or Powe in that series, and the Bulls didn't exactly dominate them in the paint.
In my opinion, the Bulls are a team comprised of parts that don't match, and a roster filled with holes. They relied heavily on Gordon in the playoffs, but he's just a pure scorer and not the type of player you want to rely on to get you to the next level. Hinrich is a quality guard, but he's not Allstar material either. Rose and Deng may be the Bulls' best hopes, but Deng is a bit of a question mark after last season. The frontcourt, as I said above, is a major weakness for them and they still lack anyone who can consistently get them easy buckets in the paint. The team has talent, but it's going to take some major overhauling to turn them into a contender in my opinion.
Nobody is going to overpay Ben Gordon. If nobody offered him a big deal in the past 2 years when they actually had money, there's a 0% chance now that nobody has money.
|
United States4471 Posts
On June 18 2009 14:53 Xeris wrote:Nobody is going to overpay Ben Gordon. If nobody offered him a big deal in the past 2 years when they actually had money, there's a 0% chance now that nobody has money.
Depends on your definition of "overpay" 
You're right though that he's going to have trouble finding the money he's looking for (or even what he turned down previously) with the way the economy is affecting teams' spending.
|
Well, he turned down what, 55 million? THAT was overpaying. I think he's worth between 30-40 million over 5-6 years.
|
HonestTea
5007 Posts
On June 18 2009 05:34 tenbagger wrote:Show nested quote +On June 17 2009 20:32 HonestTea wrote:
Slasher has nothing to do with jumper.
Kobe is slasher.
Paul Pierce is slasher.
Ray Allen used to be a mean ass slasher I gotta disagree with you there HT. I have never heard anyone refer to Kobe as a "slasher". Not in print media, not on TV broadcasts and not on the radio. I could be wrong but I believe the term slasher is used to refer to an athletic wingman whose main offensive weapon is to "slash" to the basket which implies that they have a suspect J. Guys like Kobe and MJ are better at "slashing" than anyone else in the league but they were never referred to as "slashers" (except during their early career when their jumpshots were not developed) because they possessed a refined offensive game. Every single time I've heard someone called a slasher on a TV broadcast, it was a quick athletic wing player that had a suspect J.
True, true, I guess my point was more that the label "slasher" and the skillset of "slashing" are sometimes not used the way they should be.
Damn media, fucking up again.
Oh and re: Chicago - Dumping Gordon will make them better. Has a Nick Van Exel team ever had real success?
And the whole chicago thing is hilarious to me because in the early 2000's they had too many young big men (THE CURRY-CHANDLER ERA!!!!!) and not enough quality guards. Now, they have too many young guards and not enough quality big men!
|
Ben Gordon would be an amazing 6th man.... I don't know why you guys think they should dump him. If they can get a fair contract for him, he would be great
|
On June 18 2009 10:31 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
Chicago needs to get some solid post players or they'll never be a serious threat to any of the contenders.
You can pretty much sum up our (chicago's) problem with this sentence...
How long have we been hearing this problem in Chicago, and it still remains the Achilles heel of this team. The only problem I had with drafting Rose was that he wouldn't address this situation at all, and I happen to have a feeling Deng won't be very good next year (just a feeling)...
We need a REAL post player as soon as possible - this team is far to lacking in depth otherwise.
(come on lebron...you know you would like it in Chicago  )
|
United States22883 Posts
On June 18 2009 16:19 Comeh wrote:Show nested quote +On June 18 2009 10:31 XaI)CyRiC wrote:
Chicago needs to get some solid post players or they'll never be a serious threat to any of the contenders. You can pretty much sum up our (chicago's) problem with this sentence... How long have we been hearing this problem in Chicago, and it still remains the Achilles heel of this team. The only problem I had with drafting Rose was that he wouldn't address this situation at all, and I happen to have a feeling Deng won't be very good next year (just a feeling)... We need a REAL post player as soon as possible - this team is far to lacking in depth otherwise. (come on lebron...you know you would like it in Chicago )
But you had Ben Wallace!!
+ Show Spoiler +Way to overpay and steal him from us, douche bags.
|
Yeah, DET was the only place Ben Wallace was a legit defensive threat.
|
United States22883 Posts
|
I'd stick with Tay over Arazia
|
Canada9720 Posts
On June 18 2009 16:01 Xeris wrote:
Ben Gordon would be an amazing 6th man.... I don't know why you guys think they should dump him. If they can get a fair contract for him, he would be great
do you think gordon would want to come off the bench after the boston series? he played pretty erratically , but the couple game-winning shots he did could certainly make him accept no less than a starting 2 guard position somewhere
personally though, i agree with you and i hope he stays with chicago
|
He might be alright with it if he was pulling a Manu where he comes off the bench but is getting starter playing time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc109/iloseonpurpose/jeanie_buss_phil_jackson.jpg)
