SB Nation User Blog: MPG

Plan C (or D? or E?): Go Young.

MPG — Mon, 21 Dec 2009 13:54:08 -0000

I don't believe for a second that a major free agent comes to Chicago. Not Chris Bosh, who could pair with Yao Ming and the cohesive Rockets in his native Texas. Not Dewayne Wade, who can lure Carlos Boozer to South Beach just by batting one of his disconcertingly effete eyelashes. And certainly not King James, who can either keep playing for a title contender, or go to what everybody calls Basketball Mecca (though why I don't know, considering they suck). No, chances are that our 2010 dreams end in either Joe Johnson or David Lee. Or neither.

I'd prefer neither.

Go young. It's simple, it's realistic, and it's cheap (and judging from YaoPau's recent post, this may be what matters). It will entail taking on a few aging, bloated pseudo-stars. It will also entail tossing our 2010 plans into the same bonfire to which was consigned the Elton Brand, the Twin-Towers, and the Hustle & Grit Plans, respectively.

This is why I think going young might actually work this time.

Reason numero uno is Derrick Rose, who I still believe has both the ability and desire to be a top ten NBA player, perennial all-star, and eventual NBA champ. I believe this not so much because of his recent domination of the athletic (and good) Atlanta Hawks, but because I recently checked out some old highlights. And it was obvious that he's been playing hobbled. Here's how athletic Derrick is: working at about 75%, he's still an "athletic" point guard capable of putting up decent numbers with a mismatched and bad supporting cast. He certainly fooled my ass - I thought he was healthy. He's not. Just getting there.

Then I got to watch a little of Chris Paul, who's recently back from injury. He was going against the Raptors, a poor defensive team, and getting killed. Offensively, defensively, every which way you can get killed, Marcus Banks killed him. Marcus Banks. Which pretty much cemented, for me, the necessity of judging players when they're healthy.

Reasons 2A and 2B are Joakim Noah and Luol Deng respectively. I don't need to elaborate except to say that they've played at a high level for much of a blighted year. Especially if Luol continues to shoot three pointers well and adds volume, there's no reason to think he can't be a good fit with Derrick. And with one more summer at Venice Beach pumping iron, Joakim Noah will be an absolute beast. He's bordering on that now.

The upshot is that Derrick Rose (21), Luol Deng (24) and Joakim Noah (24) are a better nucleus that Kirk, Ben and Luol ever were. More talent, more size, more upside. Give them the right complements, and they could win big.

Reason 3 is that the players to complement that nucleus are available now, and we likely have the resources to get them. Here's what I have in mind.

- Start with Anthony Randolph. I've had the misfortune to watch quite a few GS games this year, and his lack of playing time is hilarious. Just bizarre. He's more talented and polished right now than Tyrus is, with a scorer's mentality that would be terrific next to Noah. He can post, shoot from the perimeter, and run the floor. He rebounds at a high level and defends the paint. Need us to take Maggette off your hands? Fine. Tyrus + Jerome James + James Johnson for Randolph and Maggette. Corey isn't bad off the bench, gets to the line, and can run (when so inclined).

- Jerryd Bayless. For some reason, Portland only plays him when everybody else is hurt, and that reason is that everybody else is awesome. They've got a glut of talent, but they've long loved Hinrich, and they're looking to rid themselves of Andre Miller, who was a poor fit from the start. Hinrich for A. Miller and Bayless. Once Rudy gets back, they're again looking at the best backcourt in the league. And Bayless would be a tremendous asset off the bench for us, a scorer who gets to the line and pushes the ball. Miller would play 10 minutes behind Rose, and twirl his weird musketeers' mustache for 38.

- The draft. This is pretty much the perfect set of players for the Bulls' needs, deep at shooting guard and power-forward. Favors, Johnson, Henry, and Turner are just a few of the players I've seen who could fill a role for us. There are also some brutes available (Pittman, Cousins) who wouldn't be half bad behind Noah.

- Coaching. The Trailblazers are the Blazers not just because of Brandon Roy, but because of Nate McMillan. We need an experienced, successful coach who can construct plays out of a time out, teach players, and command their attention. Nothing against The Black, but he just isn't that guy. Despite being Italian.

- The 3rd Tier Free agents. There's going to be some bargain hunting in the summer of 2010, because for as many players who get mega bucks, others will get screwed. Players like Mike Miller, shooting 56% from 3, could be had for a song. So sing, Jerry. It won't cost a thing.

* * *

Anyway, that's what I'd like to see instead of waiting for 2010. Give me a deep team headlined by elite young talent and a coach to lead them. Give me scoring off the bench and three point shooters to spread the floor. Just please don't give me David Lee and another decade of first-round exits.

Blow up the Defense

MPG — Mon, 28 Sep 2009 21:33:07 -0000

I'm gonna start with two premises. The first is that football affords quick turn-arounds, especially if you're only turning around one side of the ball. We've seen numerous examples - the Dolphins' being the most recent - in which bottom-dwellers go to playoff teams in the blink of an offseason. The second premise is that no team with a pro-bowl quarterback can be half-bad. Unfortunately, the Bears currently are half-bad - with the other half being Jay Cutler.

This is my argument for why it's time to blow up the defense.

I'm typical - I like defense. Hitting, specifically, and preferably when it's done by Lance Briggs. Unfortunately, our generally thrifty Bears have invested major cash in oft-injured and largely unproductive players, the main culprits being Tommie Harris, Nathan Vasher, and even - though it pains me to say it - the Uberlacker himself. He's coming off a non-probowl year after a few in which he was a probowler in name only. Prior to the injury, the only times he was mentioned during games was to note a fullback's spectacular block. And as far as his injury, though I like Hunter Hillenmeyer, I don't see how well he's "filled in" as a testament to his ability. I see it as a sign that Urlacher, the former face of the franchise, has become another exceptionally expensive and totally average player.

Note the word former. Because this is Jay's team now; I just hope Jerry Angelo realizes it.

Let's go to the numbers. The Bears defensive rank in terms of ppg declined from 2005-2008: from 1st to 3rd to 16th to 16th again. In terms of ypg, they declined from #2 to #5 to #28 to #21. Now let's look at where the money on our team is allocated. Tommie Harris, Brian Urlacher, and Nathan Vasher account for roughly 23.2 million this year. To give you a sense of perspective, our entire starting offense makes 23.9 million.

Dumb? Probably. But when you factor in that the defense is not only expensive and average, but aging, it makes the distribution downright nuts.

I'm going to go out on a limb: a team that overpays for an average (or less) unit isn't going to the superbowl. And yet, this team has that kind of promise. The trouble is, at present, it's all on offense.

Jay Cutler, Greg Olsen, Matt Forte, and even Chris Williams all have star potential at critical positions. Once the o-line gells, the Bears have the ability to field the most explosive offense in civic memory. Even more importantly, those key players are all young, and relatively free from the kind of toxic behavior that's derailed so many players (Vick, Owens, etc) in the past.

Blow the defense up, I say. Offer to "rework" the contracts of the big three I've mentioned, and if they won't be reworked, cut them. Our new nucleus can have us competitive for the next decade. To be great, though - I'm not all that crazy about eeking out wins against the Seahawks' second-stringers! - they need to be paired with a dominant defense. Not one that was dominant in 2005.

The combination of a stable (and talented) coaching staff, and our new nucleus, ensures that we won't have to suffer through the perpetual rebuilding of, say, the Lions. Granted: it's going to be painful watching a weak-ass defense in that transition year. It's painful even writing "weak-ass defense." It means not resigning productive but aging veterans like Adewale Ogunleye. It means taking those funds and signing our offensive ballers to long term deals. It also means giving our next few drafts entirely over to defense - any and all positions.

It's worth it. We'll get to the superbowl eventually with Jay; not that it won't be different when we do. We'll be a pass-first, offensive juggernaut with a young but rising defense. Kind of like the Colts in 2005.

The guys who won.

Small Reasons the Bulls might be Great

MPG — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 12:04:24 -0000

We've hashed out the likely suspects. Most of us already know them by heart. Derrick develops into a superstar. Tyrus develops a brain. There's also the more seasonal causes for optimism: X gained Y pounds of muscle, whereas Z is no longer a break-dancing, kung-fu fatty. Probably the most standard shlock comes from the organization itself. We've heard it each year for ten. That playoff push/1st round loss/2nd round loss was invaluable! Our team has had another year to gell! I've always wanted to respond: fellas, so has the rest of the league.

This year, though, is unique. I'll put my premise right out there, and I'll even bold it for more convienent lampooning. This is the best Bulls team in a decade. Here are five unconventional reasons why.

1) We have an alpha dog. The Bulls deserve some cred for recognizing their own dumb luck. Since landing Derrick they've done everything in their power - and some things I wish they hadn't - to place Derrick at the center of the organization. For once, our most talented player is the player to which we've hitched our wagons. And for once, we have a player whose talent is such that it warrants wagon-hitching.

An example. Too often, last year, Derrick would dribble downcourt, hand the ball off, and float into a corner where, to the best of my knowledge, he physically dissolved. Were the shot clock to run down, the ball would go to one of our vets, who were much more experienced at jacking up bad shots than Derrick. Not so this year. Who will the ball go to when the clock is winding down? Our best player.

Even the best offense breaks down, and nobody would use that adjective to describe what the Bulls run. Remember the number of times MJ pulled a last second shot (or pass) out of his butt? Or the number of times Kobe bails out the lakers? In those moments - and they are frequent - it's essential to have everyone on the same page. To have everyone thinking get the ball to X and get open. In fact, I'd argue it's better to have five guys working in concert to get the ball to flawed alpha dog, than to have five guys trying to "make something happen."

Independent of his development as a player, Derrick's not a rookie anymore. The moments of helter-skelter basketball on a helter-skelter team will improve. Meaning that - despite the catchy nickname - Captain Kirk shouldn't be a captain anymore. In name or in practice.

2) Roles and rotation. I don't believe the day has come. Our PG is a PG. Our C is a C. Our SF is a SF. Our SG and SF are...close enough. Better yet: the bench. Our combo guard will be backing up both the 1 and 2 (go figure). We have a pint-sized fire-off-the-bench guy (Pargo) who will be used to bring..well, offensive fire-power in a pinch. Brad Miller, a superb back up center, will be our back-up center. It's a novel concept for our organization: sign players with games and positions that don't overlap. Assuming an 8.5 (the .5 is Pargo) man rotation, there's no redundancy here. It's frakking elegant.

3) Larry Hughes. Is gone. This is the first team in years unburdened by either very bad or very selfish players. Larry Hughes. The latter day Andres Nocioni. Jamal Crawford. Ron Mercer. If you're cringing, rest easy. There's not a ball-hogging malcontent to be found on this roster. And thank God. Not only do you lose with players like that, it makes for unwatchable basketball.

4) Size. This team is big. Derrick is a big point guard, Salmons is a large two. Luol Deng, at 6.9 235, is a downright huge SF. We now have two skilled seven footers who actually play like it. Additionally, JJ brings something we haven't had since Antonio Davis: burliness. 22 reps at the combine. And 21-0 in MMA. :)

Gone are the days that the Bulls are the "little team that could." And good riddance.

5) One agenda. There's just been so much b.s. over the years. We've played bad players to raise their trade value. We've benched good young players because our interim coach needed to "win." We've had players playing for contracts and players we've paid to leave. I seem to imagine one coach actually surrendering in mid-season, on Christmas Eve. I wouldn't have made it that long.

Basta. Enough. Nobody's playing for a contract. Nobody's pissed about their contract. We're experienced enough not to give a crap about trade rumors. And the ego issues - usually stemming from minutes distribution - won't be as pronounced, since we actually have a defined and balanced roster.

The only issues are basketball issues. Now let's play.

How can we luck out again?

MPG — Tue, 19 May 2009 13:33:59 -0000

Wendy's terrific post from yesterday got me thinking draft, or more accurately, how a lucky ping-pong ball saved our franchise last year. So I'm wondering how a few more lucky (or unlucky, depending on your point of view) breaks can tip our franchise over the edge.

Two ideas pop to mind immediately. First, we want to avoid the creation of any new Eastern conference powers. Second, we want to create teams that have a surplus of talent at a position where we have need.

This isn't a one man draft, but it's fairly close. All the other "top" players have serious question marks - James Harden had a terrible tournament and was completely blanketed when facing good defenders, such asUSC's Daniel Hackett. Hasheem Thabeet got demolished - absolutely crushed - by Dejuan Blair. Etc. The premise here is that no team in their right mind, despite their roster, would ever ever ever consider taking anybody but the big guy #1. So let's examine how the possible results of the Blake Griffin sweepstakes effect your Chicago Bulls.

1. Sac-town. Terrific! Get Blake out of conference, first, and to a team whose fans aren't jerks, second. More importantly, here's a good example of how a glut could be created. That would leave Sactown with Hawes, Thompson, and Griffin down low, but with jack at the point guard and small forward. Hawes and Griffin are a perfect fit for each other - high post, low post. If Thomson, who is a great talent but tailed off after an impressive start, is available...is there anyone short of Rose you wouldn't offer?

2. Washington. Worst of all outcomes. Arenas, Butler, and Griffin make up three potential all-stars. Angle #2: if they get Griffin, they look to trade Jamison. Angle #3: if we get Jamison, I barf.

3. Clippers. Pros: Clippers don't have to suck, Griffin's out of conferance, and they may decide for the uber-youth movement, jettisoning Kaman for a cut-rate price in order to go with Jordan, Blake and the expiring Marcus Camby down low. Cons: someone on BaB will suggest that, really, if you just squint for awhile at Zack Randolph, you start to wonder...

4. OKC. Look out. That team could be scary, and they have a need at four. And, seeing as they're in the Western Conference, it doesn't effect us too much. Hidden upside: the Thunder become the new hotshot team in the West, stealing the...well, thunder...from Portland and its feral fans. Wouldn't their smug GM have earned his comeuppance when Blake Griffin dunks all over Greg Oden, and they see their dreams of ascendancy Pritch-snapped?

5. Minnesota. They've got karma on their side, people. They also would have a surplus of bigs and lack quality wings and points. Not only would that surplus replicate a position, it would replicate three players' size and bruising style. A style our team definitely needs. And did I mention their point guards/small forwards consist of Sebastian Telfair, the other Bobby Brown, Kevin Ollie, Rodney Carney, and Corey Brewer's remaining ankle?

6. Memphis. Never wins anything. Ever.

7. Golden State. I like Blake in Golden State. A lot. I also like Brenan Wright. A lot.

8. New York. Another vile destination. New York's heartless, mercenary, and oh-so typical LeBron ass-slurpage would be greatly abetted by the addition of a viable NBA player.

9. Toronto. This is Blake Griffin mecca for Bulls fans. Blake gives the Raptors sufficent toughness that even Andrea Bargnani can be a legit NBA big despite the lack of testicles. He also makes Bosh expendable, if a 25 y.o. all-star is ever expendable. It means the only thing Toronto lacks to be a contender is a sf and a shot blocker. It means that...

But of course, that's impossible. What team ever lucked out and won the lottery with a 1.7% chance?

Retaliation (and why I don't want to see it)

MPG — Wed, 29 Apr 2009 16:29:13 -0000

I hope the Bulls are as pissed as I am right now. But we're likely angry for different reasons, and the last thing I want to see is the Bulls committing a flagrant foul on a Celtics player out of some made-for-TV lust for revenge.

The reason I'm so pissed right now isn't just that the Bulls lost last night. (Though it sure doesn't help.) It's that the series has epitomized both what is so inspiring and disheartening about NBA hoops. The basketball has been incredible - truly inspired efforts by players like Rondo and, at times, Rose and Gordon. But the buffoonery has been equally pathetic. Perkins has never, to date, committed a foul that didn't require immediate theatrics. Allen, who fouls like a narcoleptic twitches, can't believe that he apparently has to abide by the same rules as other players. BG feels that, after a display of great balls, he has to grab his. And lording over all this theatrical nonsense is Garnett himself, sticking his chin out like Tony Montoya, fearful either that the Celtcs will lose or, more likely, that he won't be in the spotlight when they win. I've never seen a more shameful display of egoism. From the faux-drama of "will he sit on the bench?" to the slightly more dramatic question of "when will he dislocate his jaw?", we've been treated to a marvelous display of TnT camera work, making certain we get every last sneer and mug for the camera. And don't be naive: they are most certainly for the cameras.

The worst part is, the NBA has fostered this bufoonery, allowing Lord Kevin the leeway to bark like a dog, lech on female reporters, and cross the line to the point that NBA GMs wondered when the league would reign him in. Well they didn't, and no wonder: this shit actually sells.

It's not just the entire Boston Celtics' quest to mimic a man mimicing a WWF wrestler that's irritating. It's the disparity in the calls. I'll preface this by saying that bad calls are bound to happen, and that we've been the beneficiary of some. (For instance that double foul with Ray and Miller: play on, folks.) The issue here is that the NBA has steadily allowed fakery - AKA "accentuating contact" - to be an actual basketball skill. Rondo goes the line far, far more than he should, simply because any time he initiates contact he goes to the floor like he's been shot in the chest. D. Rose bulls through the lane, doesn't say boo, and gets creamed: no call. Why? He's not "accentuating the contact." Apparently the Chicago Public League needs to start teaching that the best players are actually - little known fact - thespians. (Where I grew up we called them pussies.)

(Likewise, with the drawing of charges: does this play exist solely to keep slow, vertically-challenged, and mostly caucasian players in the league? When Scalabrine slides under an airborne Rose, and he's still moving, it's a foul. Each time. Just like when Nocioni did it.)

So let's move to the subject on everybody's mind, the play that absolutely captures what I've loved and hated about this series. Miller cruising in for an open layup in a tight OT game, Rondo jacks him in the face. Let's be conservative and say Brad's arm is three feet long, so unless Rondo briefly developed severe diplopia, he jacked him on purpose. The game has to be delayed while Miller staunches a good amount of blood flow, allowing ample time for the refs to view what Henry Abbott, noted Bull-hater Charles Barkley, and any rational (ie non-Celtic) fan would recognize as a flagrant 1. By rule: two shots and the ball.

Except that rules don't matter here.

On one side of this equation is the Bulls: a pretty quiet team who probably aren't going to win anything this year. On the other side is the Boston Celtics, a team that's lobbied in the papers (Perkins, who noted the refs didn't "like" them, wasn't called for a single foul yesterday) and had the Boston Globe lobby on their behalf, suggesting a Chicago-connection with the refs of game 4. (For an even more inflammatory piece, perhaps they could examine the Chicago connection to Doc Rivers?) Needless to say, this Celtics team that "sold" every bit of contact and worked the refs with "veteran saavy" make for a far, far more compelling rematch with the Cavs than any other team. Rematch, revenge, theatrics. Remember: this shit actually sells.

The call didn't go to the Celtics because the refs wanted the Celtics to win. It went there because the refs wanted to give the Celtics every chance to win. It went to te Celtics because the refs couldn't let a bad break (Miller's nasion, actually) go against the defending champs. The reasoning was probably akin to "players should decide the game". Which is really great reasoning, excepting the fact that Rajon Rondo jacked Brad Miller in the face.

Like I said, rules didn't matter. Not at a pivotal moment like that. But if a rule doesn't apply in the essential moment, why have it?

Now we get game 5. The Bulls are rightfully pissed. They've taken all the nasty hits in the series while the Celtics have done all the limping and crying. We'll probably see Tyrus Thomas, with his enigmatic cauldron of rage, elbow somebody (my money's on Perk), preciptating some lame pseudo-scrum that will end with Scalabrine and Linton Johnson ejections. Then the obligatory primetime Bulls-Celtics bloodfeud on next year's Christmas Day: buy your tickets now.

I hope they don't retaliate. I hope when the Bulls lose to this collection of faking, preening, entitled jackasses, they do so playing actual basketball. That might not cut it in today's NBA, but it can be the stuff of classics.

And speaking of classics: everybody keeps saying this series lives up to that billing. It doesn't. But it could have.

Game Preview #31 - Bulls at New Jersey Nets

MPG — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 16:16:03 -0000

[Thanks to MPG for today's preview -ed.]

It's getting pretty tough to talk or write about these Bulls without imagining a trade. At this point it's almost reflexive. Rose makes a nice play...you wonder how well he'd run the pick & roll with with somebody who rolled. BG drops thirty...you wish they had an interior to balance the scoring load. 112 games of ineptitude have hardwired us to scour draft-boards (draftexpress) and seedy trade-shysters (hoopsworld) for a lonely tittle of hope. It simultaneously sucks and blows - which isn't just a description of Noah's conditioning.

So we look for scapegoats. Not that there's a lack of genuine goats around. Nocioni (rotate!), VDN (coach!), and Deng (bark!) have all taken their fair share of flak, and it's understandable. Better to have a single, encapsulated problem than a metastatic mess. That's the reason for scapegoats - it makes a complicated problem seem simple. Or even solvable.

Lucky for us, tonight (6:30) we get to see a team that offers hope - the New Jersey Nets.

Hope to get a win? Probably not. The Nets, along with the Lakers, Celtics and Blazers, are uniquely suited to kicking our ass. Derrick Rose struggles to contain penetration and Devin Harris (24.7, 6.4) is the best pg in the East. We're small at shooting guard and Vince Carter isn't just big - he actually has post moves. And we all know the issues we have inside, where our centers are alternately too slow and weak to match up with Brook Lopez, to say nothing of the ersatz all-star, Yi Jianlian, who brings height, athleticism, and perimeter skill. These Bulls seem hell-bent on giving career nights to every middling NBA grunt who's ever had a delusion of grandeur, so look for Yi to light it up. Complicating matters is the fact that we beat New Jersey just a few weeks ago. They're hungry; we're demoralized and divided. Not good.

I mentioned hope up there somewhere. I meant it. Here's a team (New Jersey) that should be the model for the Bulls moving forward. Just two years ago they were saddled with an over-the-hill Jason Kidd, the bloated contract of Vince Carter, and the somewhat redundant Richard Jefferson. A few trades later and they've assembled complementary young players to which that they've committed themselves. Complementary: as in not redundant.

New Jersey, not coincidentally, is set up to be a major player in 2010.

And after all, it's not as if the Bulls don't have talent, however misdistributed it might be. Rose has gone from viewed as "unready" to a player with an all-star floor and top-5 ceiling. Gordon is having his best season. Thabo and Tyrus are showing signs. Hinrich, Gooden and Deng have all had success in the past. It'll give themselves something to talk about tonight - they're all are out with injuries.

Let's hope Paxson isn't asleep at the wheel tonight when he watches what he should've constructed play what he has. He can see what a few judicous trades can do.

And there you go: you start to talk Bulls, you end up talking trades.

Alternative viewpoints at Nuthin'butNets, and Netsdaily.

Game Preview #22 - Chicago Bulls vs. Memphis Grizzlies

MPG — Fri, 12 Dec 2008 17:12:19 -0000

[Thanks to MPG for today's preview -ed.]

Two days have passed since Vinny del Negro put his foot down with regard to the lack of professionalism exhibited by certain Bulls, which means that I fully expect Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah to log major minutes tonight.

If that sounds nonsensical, consider the man in charge. VDN's modus operandi, thus far, is to play good-cop/bad-cop all by himself, delivering positivity with one hand and smackdowns with the other. Neither does the quality of play seem to impact his lineups. Noc has struggled this year; he's regularly in the game at crunch time. Tyrus's had a two-game stretch of 21 points, 15 rebounds and 5 blocks; it was followed by 5 minutes against Washington and zilch against the Knicks. Gray didn't have a steal, block or point against Washington (though he did have 9 boards); VDN started him against the run-run Knicks, a game for which Aaron was particularly ill-suited. Now it's completely plausible, and consistent with pre-VDN incidents, that practice-performance is the reason for these otherwise baffling moves. It's also totally plausible that VDN is over his head, completely lost, and he's just flailing away, both with lineups and his treatment of players. In either case I fully expect to see both Joakim and T2 play and play well.

So about Memphis (7-15 overall, 5-5 at home, two-game winning streak).

In most years, O.J. Mayo would be the Rookie of the Year by a wide margin, and deservedly so. The guy is legit. Strong defender, terrific spot-up shooter, can draw fouls taking it to the rack, though he doesn't have the quickness to beat his man cleanly off the dribble. The stuff about him being a point- or combo-guard is wrong for exactly that reason. He also shoots a terrific percentage for a rookie guard (47%) and rebounds fairly well (4.2 RPG). Expect him to be aggressive early and throughout. Rose is popular in Memphis, and gets the vast majority of the pub for ROY, which can't sit well with a player of Mayo's ability.

Rapidly becoming the second wheel is Rudy Gay, a slasher whose numbers have declined slightly month to month. He's got a beautiful pull-up jumper and his athleticism has given Luol problems in the past, so tonight should be a good litmus test regarding Deng's progress. They get steady post-play from Marc Gasol, Aaron's kindred in size and draft position, but are weak at both point and power forward. Gnashing of teeth is provided by Mike Iavaroni whereas Darko handles the rending of garments.

We should win this game. Gasol is the kind of player Gray (who practiced despite knee bursitis) can neutralize, though a better tact might be to take Noah and run Gasol out of the gym. Conley, an awful defender, couldn't stay in front of Rose if his life depended on it, and look for Gordon to bounce back after a lackluster game against the Knicks. In fact, that could be said for the entire Bulls team. The Knicks game left a bad taste in our mouths (by which I mean, us the fans), and the Bulls have had a few games to practice. There's no reason to come out flat tonight. .500 is within reach.

More importantly, so are these.

For a Memphis point of view check out Beyond the Arc. The other sites I checked out haven't been updated for awhile [ed. note: Forgot 3ShadesofBlue]...which either means the people of Memphis are too high minded for sports blogging, or the Grizzlies stink.

A New Development in the Story of Rose:

MPG — Mon, 24 Nov 2008 15:03:45 -0000

teams are gameplanning him. For three nights now - at Portland, Golden State and Denver - the singular goal of their defenses was to stop Derrick. The strategy thus far is simple: double team hard, and as far from the hoop as necessary. Do what you have to get the ball out of his hands. And while it's cool that teams have decided, this early in his career, that Rose is a player worth gameplanning (you don't see, for instance, teams worrying in the same way about Mayo or Beasley), it also provides a unique challenge. He never saw this at Memphis, and in high school the talent divide was such that it didn't matter what defenses did. This is a new thing he's facing - elite athletes, several, who are bent on getting the ball out of his hands. He's getting the star treatment, and it's kinda cool.

But now it's time to for VDN to adjust. That's right - I'm asking him to "coach".

The reason is simple - it's a risky, bad defense to double that hard and that far from the basket. One play demonstrates what I'm talking about. Rose was doubled in no-man's land, Nocioni cuts to the top of the key. Easy pass to Noc. Noc, in the middle of the floor, has easy passes to one of three players spaced around the perimeter. There are only two players remaining to defend. Simple pass to wide open Hunter; and the three pointer is good.

Easy passes made easy by one cut. One. Every person who played high school basketball on this forum has made that cut, and seen those options open up literally hundreds times. For most of us, that cut and those passes are muscular memory by now. It's why teams don't try that b.s. with Nash, Parker, or CP3 - they know that they'll get torched.

The other option, of course, is this.

Noah's a superb player to make that cut. He's a big target, got good hands, good vision, and if the perimeter is well spaced he just has to beat one man for the dunk. Surrounded by good perimeter shooters like Gordon, Noc, Deng, and even Gooden, teams would have no choice but to go back to a soft-double, or no double at all, in which case Derrick can go back to killing them.

It's on VDN. He's at the helm, manning the wheel. Teams have adjusted to his offense, the famed GDG (go Derrick go), and now it's up to him to adjust in turn.

It's a simple play, too. Any experienced coach would know that.

Now, 2010 Makes Sense

MPG — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 13:47:12 -0000

Superstars want three things: money, a market, and a chance to win it all. I'd like to suggest that, in the summer of 2010, no team in the NBA will be able to offer more of what's good than your Chicago Bulls.

Let's look at the competition. New York will spend money, as always, and it's the best city in the world if money is never an issue. But the Knicks stink. There's not one star on that team, unless you count Starbury, and nobody except Starbury does. The Lakers will be capped out with their own formidable big three. And New Jersey: good God just go to New Jersey. Go to the Izod center. That stadium and those fans are awful. Unless the Nets move to Brooklyn, which is looking increasingly doubtful, they can't offer nearly the package of place and players that the Bulls can. Which is this:

Max money, enormous marketing opportunities, and the opportunity to play with one of the best young players in the game. Excellent role players - Deng and Gordon - entering their prime. An amazing city to live in.

Hello, Chris Bosh.

The Bulls need to position themselves now. The best part is, they can do so while still winning. Trade Hinrich for Brad Miller. Trade Nocioni and Sefolosha for Al Harrington. Take Gooden's expiring deal and use it to sign Gordon. The tandem of Noah and Miller up front would be better than anything we have now, and playing with a credible big man will only accelerate Rose's growth. That team would be a rising playoff team in the improved East, making the Bulls even more attractive to the likes of Bosh, Wade, Dirk...you know the drill.

Then, in 2010, you'd have Harrington, Hughes and Miller coming off the books. That's thirty million dollars. That's a prime free agent and, to my way of thinking, a championship-caliber team.

Free-agency was never an option for the Bulls before. They didn't have a star to play alongside - Derrick Rose is in the process of changing that. They had a meddling, slightly creepy GM - Pax changed that. They had an egomaniacal coach with a reputation for being a hardass - now VDN's in town. Almost completely by accident, the Bulls have stumbled into being the most attractive destination for the marquee players that, to the best of my knowledge, they've never considered.

Thank you, ping-pong-balls. Let's hope Pax shows his gratitude by turning on his blue-tooth, getting off his ass, doing his job and making a deal.

Bulls-Blazers Trade

MPG — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 17:08:47 -0000

Hello all,

Long time Blogabull poster here, and a fan of the city of Portland. I'm sorry to hear about Oden, but encouraged that the injury isn't serious - the kid is a future star, no doubt about it. On to the potential trade:

The Bulls roster is a mess. We have too many point guards, too many power forwards, and no established shooting guards or centers. You guys have two terrific shooting guards and no established point guard. You've also got an enormous talent in Jerryd Bayless who's riding the pine for lack of playing time. If you saw that kid at Arizona, you know that needs to be rectified. You've also got a superb post scorer in LMA (a pox upon you, Pritchard) who doesn't rebound that much (well maybe not a pox, exactly). The Oden plan to complement him with a strong rebounder/defender is a good one. Unfortunately, it may not work this year due to injuries - and the lack of conditioning those injuries cause.

How about Kirk Hinrich and Drew Gooden for Rudy Fernandez, Raef and Steve Blake?

Here's my reasoning: a three guard rotation of Hinrich, Brandon Roy and Jerryd Bayless would be one of the best in the league. You'd have an excellent ballhandler/defender in Kirk, an all-around star in Roy, and tons of scoring punch off the bench in Bayless. Jerryd is a combo guard - so let him get tick playing behind both Hinrich and Roy. Sergio could get spot minutes - which is more than he'll be getting as it is.

In terms of down low, I think Gooden would complement LMA pretty well. He's a great rebounder, strong, and can knock down jumpshots when teams try to double LaMarcus. Then, when Oden comes back, he can slide into a backup role. Best of all: next season, when Greg is ready to dominate, you don't have to pay Gooden. His contract is up after this year.

It helps the Bulls in two ways. First, Kirk's gotta go - while he's a very good point, he's not a good two guard, and the Bulls' point guard for the next decade or so is Derrick Rose. Secondly, we're probably losing Ben Gordon next year. We need a two who can complement Derrick - and that means somebody you can run and shoot from long range. Rudy can do both.

Anyhow, good luck to you all. It's easy to like the Blazers - exciting youth and a paucity of jerks. It should be an exciting season (for both teams).