One of the best series ever: Celtics win 4-3

[Banedon]

Jesus, Paxson looks OLD

 

http://www.nba.com/media/bulls/paxson_050422.jpg

[David]

Going to the game tonight!

 

200 level row 1 thru stubhub (don't ask)

 

Free decent 300 level seats to game 4 help ease the blow.

 

Can't friggin wait

[David]

Simmons - Why Celtics-Bulls could be one for the ages

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090423&sportCat=nba

 

Scenario No. 4: An aging/injured/exhausted/depleted heavyweight (Boston) fights off a hungry young challenger that's clearly coming into its own (Chicago).

 

I love the last scenario because it happens so rarely anymore: From the past 25 years, I can only remember Detroit-Cleveland (2007), Utah-Dallas (2001), Utah-Sacramento (1999), Los Angeles-Utah (1988), Boston-Atlanta (1988), Boston-Detroit (1987) and Philly-Jersey (1984). It goes to another level if you feel like the young upstarts might be building something special before our eyes.

 

And, yeah, I feel that way about the Bulls. They are slightly more talented than a depleted Boston team. They can control the boards without Kevin Garnett around. They have just as many options at the end of games. They will be positively frightening at home with their crowd behind them. (I see them winning Game 3 by 20-plus on Thursday night.) And yet, I still think they will lose the series. The playoffs come down to experience and savvy and trust and teamwork and little things like "we ran out of timeouts two games in a row" and "in Game 2, we had the ball up five with 2:30 left and a chance to put Boston away and somehow didn't feed Ben Gordon even though he had an actual fireball shooting out of his butt." These Bulls (not just the players, but the coach as well) haven't had enough playoff reps.

 

I might be wrong. Ultimately, it doesn't really matter because we're all winners. Games 1 and 2 could have been simulcast on ESPN Classic. This has a chance to be remembered as one of the most exciting Round 1 series ever played. Beyond the simple beauty of the old guard vs. new guard matchup, the following 12 subplots are either in play or have already been explored:

 

 

2. The Prodigy

 

Here's what you want from your much-ballyhooed rookie in the playoffs: You want him to raise his game a level, make his teammates better, play without fear, exhibit the requisite competitiveness and have a few "Good God, did you just see that????" moments. Through two games, Derrick Rose nailed all of these checkmarks unlike anyone we've seen since ... (gulp) ... Magic Johnson. You cannot say enough about him.

 

Of all the remarkable plays Rose made through two games, one stood out for me: With about eight minutes remaining in Game 2, Rose was backpedaling and hoping to foil a modified fast break. Instead of trying to beat Rose off the dribble, Paul Pierce lobbed a pass to Eddie House in the corner. Even though he was backpedaling, Rose sniffed the pass out, whirled around on the foul line, took TWO giant steps, improbably closed out on House's 3-pointer and tipped the shot. Watching it live, I rewound the play on TiVo even though the game was still going -- just for the record, I never, ever, ever rewind plays until the commercial -- and only because I was thinking, "Wait a second, he didn't just take two steps from the foul line and block a corner 3, did he?" Yup. He did.

 

One thing separates him from other world-class rookies who preceded him on a big stage: As far as pure point guards go, he might be the best athlete we've ever seen. If you built the ideal point guard, like how you can create a player from scratch on "NBA Live," wouldn't you basically create Derrick Rose? Lord help us if he ever learns how to shoot 3-pointers. Regardless, after Games 1 and 2, the ceiling has been removed for Derrick Rose. I am prepared for anything over the next 12 years. Anything.

[Banedon]

I laughed at this part:

 

I don't know if you noticed, but in Game 2, Garnett obliterated the record for "most playoff F-bombs dropped on the bench by someone in street clothes." Honestly, it was like Wilt's 100-point game for F-bombs; all it was missing was a postgame picture of KG holding a sign with "100" written on it. As Vegas reader Frank B. joked, "My roommate and I just invented a new drinking game. Whenever they show a close-up of KG on the bench, you drink. If he drops an F-bomb, you drink again. If he drops the MF-bomb, you chug. Important note: You need a case of beer to play this game."

[SpongeWorthy]

That Simmons article is a good read but I'm getting a "let's hype up this series that has been awesome so far only to see it fizzle into a mediocre one" vibe from it.

[David]

I laughed at a lot of things in that article. One of my favorite sports reads in a while.

[Banedon]

HAHA....On Joakim Noah:

 

He's like a cross between Bill Laimbeer, Marcus Camby and Lisa Bonet.

[Derwood]

my wife was only casually watching, but she noticed that KG was dropping bombs EVERY time they showed him

[Soul]

Well, it's certainly great to watch the Bulls involved in an exciting post-season series. I didn't think I'd see that this year.

 

I love the comments about Rose by Simmons.

[wolf stansson]

I must say he is way higher on the Bulls than I am. Especially Thomas and Noah.

 

I think I'd probably be higher on them if Vinny wasn't there. Vinny brings down my whole tone on the Bulls.

[Banedon]

I must say he is way higher on the Bulls than I am. Especially Thomas and Noah.

 

I think I'd probably be higher on them if Vinny wasn't there. Vinny brings down my whole tone on the Bulls.

 

Hampton and Holmes on the Score today did a fake Dos Equis commercial about Vinny. I highly recommend listening to it if it's available on their website or anything (that site is blocked for me at work). Funny stuff, especially if you don't like Vinny.

[David]

Say what you will about Vinny, but he has eliminated one of the most frustrating things about the Bulls over the last couple years for me about Skiles. He's allowing young players to play through their mistakes and get minutes. That's more important to me than a whole lot of things at this point in this team's development. He told Tyrus to keep shooting after that horrid night in Boston. How many coaches would've done that? Skiles/Boylan sure wouldn't have, despite the fact that it's clear that he has the basis of a good shot. He wouldn't be a good free throw shooter if he didn't.

 

Tyrus would be nothing more than an energy player who gets random blocks and rebounds in his 15 mpg. At least he has the CHANCE to become something more now.

 

I also like the fact that he doesn't bring in crappy players if he doesn't really have to. Skiles would bring in guys like Adrian Griffin in at key points in the game and I'd want to rip my hair out. I love the short rotations.

 

We've also been one of the best offensive teams in the league since the trade.

 

I don't think he's a very good coach by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think he gets piled on way too much. He's just fine for the stage that these key players are at. Just get someone in to teach Rose how to play defense over the summer.

[David]

By the way, were the Suns SSOL teams known for blowing a lot of defensive rebounds too? I heard the theory (which made a lot of sense) that the reason we don't crash the boards that much or that well is that we're always looking to get out in transition, where we are pretty damn good at scoring in. Edited April 23, 2009 by David

[cubswin2009]

Going to the game tonight!

 

200 level row 1 thru stubhub (don't ask)

 

Free decent 300 level seats to game 4 help ease the blow.

 

Can't friggin wait

You're wearing red right?

[David]

Not because of some lame promo but yes... i do admit it'll probably look cool on TV, though.

[Banedon]

Not because of some lame promo but yes... i do admit it'll probably look cool on TV, though.

 

If you wear white, we'll see you on tv. :)

[Soul]

Say what you will about Vinny, but he has eliminated one of the most frustrating things about the Bulls over the last couple years for me about Skiles. He's allowing young players to play through their mistakes and get minutes. That's more important to me than a whole lot of things at this point in this team's development. He told Tyrus to keep shooting after that horrid night in Boston. How many coaches would've done that? Skiles/Boylan sure wouldn't have, despite the fact that it's clear that he has the basis of a good shot. He wouldn't be a good free throw shooter if he didn't.

 

Tyrus would be nothing more than an energy player who gets random blocks and rebounds in his 15 mpg. At least he has the CHANCE to become something more now.

 

I also like the fact that he doesn't bring in crappy players if he doesn't really have to. Skiles would bring in guys like Adrian Griffin in at key points in the game and I'd want to rip my hair out. I love the short rotations.

 

We've also been one of the best offensive teams in the league since the trade.

 

I don't think he's a very good coach by any stretch of the imagination, but I do think he gets piled on way too much. He's just fine for the stage that these key players are at. Just get someone in to teach Rose how to play defense over the summer.

 

I'm seeing Del Harris doing a lot of talking during those timeouts. Is Vinny really coaching the team in the sense that most NBA coaches do?

 

Hats off to Vinny for finding something that is definitely working better than it was earlier in the season, but I'd still like a different coach on this ballclub. I definitely give Vinny full props for doing what he can to turn things around, especially in helping to find the right mix post-trade.

[Guest]

At least VDN is smart enough to have a guy like Del Harris around.

[David]

I love our assistants.

[SpongeWorthy]

By the way, were the Suns SSOL teams known for blowing a lot of defensive rebounds too? I heard the theory (which made a lot of sense) that the reason we don't crash the boards that much or that well is that we're always looking to get out in transition, where we are pretty damn good at scoring in.

 

2004-2005: .683 DRB% (defensive rebound percentage) 29th in the league.

2005-2006: .721 DRB% 19th in the league

2006-2007: .719 DRB% 20th in the league

2007-2008: .709 DRB% 29th in the league

 

Those are the Suns defensive rebounding percentages in their recent peak years. They were never outside of the top 4 in pace factor in those years.

 

The Bulls, by comparison, had a .709% DRB% this year, for 28th in the league. They were only 9th in pace factor though so they weren't nearly as up tempo as the Phoenix teams.

 

What's interesting is that during the best years under Skiles the Bulls would be in the top 10 in both DRB% and pace. So they really did get by on defense and hustle and not so much on talent back then.

[David]

By the way, were the Suns SSOL teams known for blowing a lot of defensive rebounds too? I heard the theory (which made a lot of sense) that the reason we don't crash the boards that much or that well is that we're always looking to get out in transition, where we are pretty damn good at scoring in.

 

2004-2005: .683 DRB% (defensive rebound percentage) 29th in the league.

2005-2006: .721 DRB% 19th in the league

2006-2007: .719 DRB% 20th in the league

2007-2008: .709 DRB% 29th in the league

 

Those are the Suns defensive rebounding percentages in their recent peak years. They were never outside of the top 4 in pace factor in those years.

 

The Bulls, by comparison, had a .709% DRB% this year, for 28th in the league. They were only 9th in pace factor though so they weren't nearly as up tempo as the Phoenix teams.

What's interesting is that during the best years under Skiles the Bulls would be in the top 10 in both DRB% and pace. So they really did get by on defense and hustle and not so much on talent back then.

 

 

Could be that we were trying to implement a system (hence the fact that we were never really rebounding that well) but just weren't that good at it earlier in the season and improved in terms of pace later in the season, but I'm not really sure what pace factor is based on.

[SpongeWorthy]

By the way, were the Suns SSOL teams known for blowing a lot of defensive rebounds too? I heard the theory (which made a lot of sense) that the reason we don't crash the boards that much or that well is that we're always looking to get out in transition, where we are pretty damn good at scoring in.

 

2004-2005: .683 DRB% (defensive rebound percentage) 29th in the league.

2005-2006: .721 DRB% 19th in the league

2006-2007: .719 DRB% 20th in the league

2007-2008: .709 DRB% 29th in the league

 

Those are the Suns defensive rebounding percentages in their recent peak years. They were never outside of the top 4 in pace factor in those years.

 

The Bulls, by comparison, had a .709% DRB% this year, for 28th in the league. They were only 9th in pace factor though so they weren't nearly as up tempo as the Phoenix teams.

What's interesting is that during the best years under Skiles the Bulls would be in the top 10 in both DRB% and pace. So they really did get by on defense and hustle and not so much on talent back then.

 

 

Could be that we were trying to implement a system (hence the fact that we were never really rebounding that well) but just weren't that good at it earlier in the season and improved in terms of pace later in the season, but I'm not really sure what pace factor is based on.

 

Yes, the pace definitely picked up post All-Star and post Salmons/Miller trade. They averaged more field goal attempts and more points but also gave up more field goal attempts, more points, more offensive rebounds etc. It was definitely a move in the right direction as they points they scored went up by over 5 and they only gave up a little over a point a game more to the opponent.

[ChiCubsFan]

too excited.

[Keener98]

We win this game by 15+

[Mike Aller]

We win this game by 15+

Really?