2010-2011 Chicago Bulls Thread

[wolf stansson]

And I have to say, completely subjectively, I find Derrick Rose's game beautiful. It may be brutish in a way, he isn't a Kobe who pokes and prods and finds his way to an open shot, he does force his way past and through people, but the way he controls his body is so graceful and awe inspiring. Angling his body to avoid defenders, holding on to the ball until the very last second, how is that not aesthetically pleasing?

Saying the word "subjectively" followed by the words "I find" is interesting. I also disagree that Derrick's game is particularly graceful. Chris Paul is graceful, Steve Nash is graceful. Rajon Rondo is deceptive and slinky. Deron Williams is deceptive and strong. Russell Westbrook is athletic but suffers a lot from the same thing Derrick does. That being sometimes the athleticism can get them places where other pg's can't go and sometimes they overcommit and have to either bail out with a chaotic pass, shoot a bad shot or turn it over. Westbrook is better at drawing a foul to avoid a bad outcome in those situations which is a significant value. Some of that is skill but some is probably due to him being weaker than Derrick. He plows through a lot of potential fouls that other players don't and can't.

 

Derrick is athletic, strong and more aggressive than any other point guard in the league. He really is the point guard equivalent of LeBron and Griff. If you can find beauty in the brutish efficiency like me, then you subjectively think it's beautiful. Objectively the best argument that can be made is that it is so damn effective that it has to be beautiful because anything that contributes that much to winning basketball games has to be considered beautiful in much the same way a white shark breaching with a seal in it's mouth is beautiful and terrible at the same time. That said, I can understand why subjectively, a basketball fan could appreciate a graceful, ballet-like point guard more.

[Banedon]

Joakim Noah told us this was the target date weeks ago, but now it is official. Noah will return when the Bulls take on the Raptors Wednesday, coach Tom Thibodeau confirmed to ESPN Chicago.

[UMFan83]

Joakim Noah told us this was the target date weeks ago, but now it is official. Noah will return when the Bulls take on the Raptors Wednesday, coach Tom Thibodeau confirmed to ESPN Chicago.

 

What did they say originally 8-10 weeks? Coming back tomorrow will put his recovery at 1 day short of 10 weeks. 69 days to be exact from surgery to return game.

 

I'm guessing that they decided to be cautious and let him take the full 10 weeks. If he had returned in 8 weeks, there was only 3 games played by the Bulls between the 10th and the 23rd (NO, CHA, SA)

[Magnetic Curses]

And I have to say, completely subjectively, I find Derrick Rose's game beautiful. It may be brutish in a way, he isn't a Kobe who pokes and prods and finds his way to an open shot, he does force his way past and through people, but the way he controls his body is so graceful and awe inspiring. Angling his body to avoid defenders, holding on to the ball until the very last second, how is that not aesthetically pleasing?

Saying the word "subjectively" followed by the words "I find" is interesting. I also disagree that Derrick's game is particularly graceful. Chris Paul is graceful, Steve Nash is graceful. Rajon Rondo is deceptive and slinky. Deron Williams is deceptive and strong. Russell Westbrook is athletic but suffers a lot from the same thing Derrick does. That being sometimes the athleticism can get them places where other pg's can't go and sometimes they overcommit and have to either bail out with a chaotic pass, shoot a bad shot or turn it over. Westbrook is better at drawing a foul to avoid a bad outcome in those situations which is a significant value. Some of that is skill but some is probably due to him being weaker than Derrick. He plows through a lot of potential fouls that other players don't and can't.

 

Derrick is athletic, strong and more aggressive than any other point guard in the league. He really is the point guard equivalent of LeBron and Griff. If you can find beauty in the brutish efficiency like me, then you subjectively think it's beautiful. Objectively the best argument that can be made is that it is so damn effective that it has to be beautiful because anything that contributes that much to winning basketball games has to be considered beautiful in much the same way a white shark breaching with a seal in it's mouth is beautiful and terrible at the same time. That said, I can understand why subjectively, a basketball fan could appreciate a graceful, ballet-like point guard more.

 

if you don't think that [expletive] like this

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DIYbWg_qNe0&feature=related

 

is graceful, you're a hater. a dirty lowdown hater. maybe it's just people don't watch rose, i don't know. i just have no clue as to how people think that someone like paul or even steve [expletive] nash is graceful and derrick rose isn't mikhail [expletive] baryshnikov amidst a bunch of tanglefooted clods.

[UMFan83]

I never thought "white shark breaching with a seal in it's mouth" would be used to describe Derrick Rose.

[Magnetic Curses]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJJ6R4SR2tw

 

graceful

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NArREQUaGo&feature=related

 

graceful

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7ge0A7Mfcg&feature=related

 

graceful

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXiDL0ZqGRY&feature=related

 

graceful

 

he may be the most "graceful" player to ever dribble a basketball. he makes several of these plays a game.

[Magnetic Curses]

I never thought "white shark breaching with a seal in it's mouth" would be used to describe Derrick Rose.

 

right? it's not like he just runs over players like lebron does. he may be big, but he's not that big. i thought the whole book on him was that he avoids contact by making insanely acrobatic ballet moves, which is why he doesn't get to the line more. haters can't have it both ways.

[wolf stansson]

\right? it's not like he just runs over players like lebron does.

Sure he does. Not big guys, but relative to his position, he's extremely brutish and I interpret the article to be very much about positional relativity. The whole stupid point of the column was that he wishes Derrick would manipulate his opponents instead of just dominating them with his superior athleticism and strength. Elusive instead of powerful.

i thought the whole book on him was that he avoids contact by making insanely acrobatic ballet moves, which is why he doesn't get to the line more.

1-Acrobatic moves that can be impressive and violent. 2-You don't think there is grace in causing intentional contact?

haters can't have it both ways.

Love the nebulous villainy of the "haters." I love Derrick Rose like I haven't loved an athlete since I was a child. I appreciate him more than I thought I could ever appreciate another athlete in my jaded, ironic adult existence. I am absolutely not a hater.

 

 

First, the absolute stupidest thing about Shoals' point is that he is penalizing Derrick for being powerful. He is arguing like grace and power are mutually exclusive when they are not. Just like my shark analogy. Sharks can use power and grace when pursuing prey. Ok, stupid analogy time is over.

 

Essentially what I'm trying to say is that I understand what he's saying even though I disagree. He prefers a point guard that overcomes relative weakness and diminutive stature with deception and guile. Derrick has deception and guile but can also bust your ass if he wants to because he is so relatively strong to his position. So the article is essentially by a writer who has a [expletive], sentimental idea of what players should be based on position and the traditional skill sets that come with those positions. That is ridiculous as I assume he's a fan of Magic Johnson, Allen Iverson, Dirk Nowitski, LeBron James, Hakeem Olajuwon, Charles Barkley and the dozens of other legendary players who are legends precisely because their talents transcended positional type. This is a hypocritical article written by someone who has made a career of approaching basketball as something as subjective as art. When you're operating under those rules, you never have to be wrong because it's all subjective, right?

 

I want to be clear that if it seemed like in my attempt to interpret the article because I'm generally a fan of Free Darko's high-minded, abstract basketball analysis that I agreed with the article, that's not necessarily true. What I agree with is that Derrick isn't as graceful as he could be because he doesn't have to be. I think where my point is lost here is that maybe we're defining grace differently. All of those clips show incredible athleticism, balance, physical intelligence and strength and if that's how you define grace, then I guess he's graceful. If you define grace as gentle, light and demure movement like as you mentioned, a ballet, then Derrick isn't graceful. That's probably a bad definition of grace though, so yes, I was wrong in defining him as not graceful. This is why evaluating sports subjectively as an art form is absolute nonsense. It's the winning versus style argument that is so prevalent in soccer and it absolutely should have no place in professional sports. Derrick is a dominant point guard and helps his team win games by being dominant and that's the point.

[Magnetic Curses]

i still don't understand at all. ballet isn't balance, athleticism, and controlled acrobatic movement? i'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around both the laurels and the thorns that he is receiving as a player.

 

you describing the mere functionality of rose and the outcome that he elicits as if he were russell crowe in a barroom brawl is baffling to me. it is not the end that makes him such a brilliant player, it is the running and jumping and twisting and contorting and wrapping himself and finding a crease and then unwrapping himself as he glimpses daylight and extends a powerful arm as a maestro at the end of a symphony and the ball falls softly, gently into the net as if he were practicing alone.

[wolf stansson]

ballet isn't balance, athleticism, and controlled acrobatic movement?

Of course it is. What it isn't is a contact sport. Which basketball is. D Rose's brand in particular.

 

i'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around both the laurels and the thorns that he is receiving as a player.

The thorns, obviously, the laurels you have down. What I'm saying is that laurels are clear and absolute and the thorns are subjective and mostly irrelevant to winning.

 

you describing the mere functionality of rose and the outcome that he elicits as if he were russell crowe in a barroom brawl is baffling to me.

Well you're baffling yourself then because I clearly did not describe Rose in those terms. To use your terms, I described Rose as both a brawler and a dancer who resorts too often to brawler for the writer's subjective taste. I then described that subjective taste as idiotic and hypocritical. What's your issue with that?

 

it is not the end that makes him such a brilliant player, it is the running and jumping and twisting and contorting and wrapping himself and finding a crease and then unwrapping himself as he glimpses daylight and extends a powerful arm as a maestro at the end of a symphony and the ball falls softly, gently into the net as if he were practicing alone.

Now you sound like the bizarro Bethlehem Shoals. Your desire to view Rose as grace personified without acknowledging his duality as both graceful and brutish is not only inaccurate, but also a disservice to Derrick's considerable talent and physical intelligence. Derrick Rose can run by you, through you around you or jump over you. You clearly appreciate the by, around and over but not the through and Shoals is too hung up on the through.

 

My whole point is that this discussion is beside the point. The point being that basketball is not art, it's sport. It's not even mostly about aesthetics so getting hung up on them is pointless in anything other than a rhetorical exercise.

[Sammy Sofa]

You two are adorable.

[Magnetic Curses]

ballet isn't balance, athleticism, and controlled acrobatic movement?

Of course it is. What it isn't is a contact sport. Which basketball is. D Rose's brand in particular.

 

i'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around both the laurels and the thorns that he is receiving as a player.

The thorns, obviously, the laurels you have down. What I'm saying is that laurels are clear and absolute and the thorns are subjective and mostly irrelevant to winning.

 

you describing the mere functionality of rose and the outcome that he elicits as if he were russell crowe in a barroom brawl is baffling to me.

Well you're baffling yourself then because I clearly did not describe Rose in those terms. To use your terms, I described Rose as both a brawler and a dancer who resorts too often to brawler for the writer's subjective taste. I then described that subjective taste as idiotic and hypocritical. What's your issue with that?

 

it is not the end that makes him such a brilliant player, it is the running and jumping and twisting and contorting and wrapping himself and finding a crease and then unwrapping himself as he glimpses daylight and extends a powerful arm as a maestro at the end of a symphony and the ball falls softly, gently into the net as if he were practicing alone.

Now you sound like the bizarro Bethlehem Shoals. Your desire to view Rose as grace personified without acknowledging his duality as both graceful and brutish is not only inaccurate, but also a disservice to Derrick's considerable talent and physical intelligence. Derrick Rose can run by you, through you around you or jump over you. You clearly appreciate the by, around and over but not the through and Shoals is too hung up on the through.

 

My whole point is that this discussion is beside the point. The point being that basketball is not art, it's sport. It's not even mostly about aesthetics so getting hung up on them is pointless in anything other than a rhetorical exercise.

 

basketball is always about aesthetics or else it would be called a slot machine. people don't like to watch the 04 pistons or the late 90's-early aughts devils or 2000 ravens. they want to see the dramatic, they want actors and the stage and they want to watch the actors do incredible things. this is what makes money and keeps the sports themselves solvent. ben wallace is never going to have a statue and neither is prince or even billups (except maybe in park hill)

[UMFan83]

DERRICK ROSE IS THE GREATEST PLAYER WHO EVER WAS OR EVER WILL BE AND PLAYS BASKETBALL AS PRETTY AS A BUTTERFLY FRESHLY HATCHED FROM ITS COCOON.

[SouthSideRyan]

DERRICK ROSE IS THE GREATEST PLAYER WHO EVER WAS OR EVER WILL BE AND PLAYS BASKETBALL AS PRETTY AS A BUTTERFLY FRESHLY HATCHED FROM ITS COCOON.

 

Thanks Stacey

[SpongeWorthy]

You don't want too much grace or you won't be able to stand.

[wolf stansson]

basketball is always about aesthetics or else it would be called a slot machine.

This is a great sentence. I'm glad aesthetics are subjective because without variety...get ready for another animal analogy...every dog would be a poodle or a pekingese. We wouldn't have Irish Wolfhounds, Rotweilers or even worse, mutts.

 

people don't like to watch the 04 pistons or the late 90's-early aughts devils or 2000 ravens. t

Obviously you want art and efficiency, which is why Derrick is a sublime player, but teams like those above are extremely important to the evolutionary, organic nature of sports. Also, plenty of people enjoyed watching those teams because true appreciation of a sport requires appreciation of every strategy employed to achieve the desired outcome.

[javy knows my name]

DERRICK ROSE IS THE GREATEST PLAYER WHO EVER WAS OR EVER WILL BE AND PLAYS BASKETBALL AS PRETTY AS A BUTTERFLY FRESHLY HATCHED FROM ITS COCOON.

 

Thanks Stacey

 

I don't know why we have to resort to calling each other girls' names

[bukie]

Bulls trade James Johnson to Toronto for a first round pick: http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/news/story?id=6148430&d

 

I'm mostly surprised they got a first rounder for JJ. It was obvious Thibs wasn't going to use him, so might as well get something for him.

[Brian]

Well it is Miami's first rounder, so it will be very late, and isn't this a very weak class?

 

But still, yeah better than nothing for someone that doesn't play.

[bukie]

Well it is Miami's first rounder, so it will be very late, and isn't this a very weak class?

 

But still, yeah better than nothing for someone that doesn't play.

Since Toronto got the 1st rounder for Bosh, and they never used it, they essentially traded Bosh for JJ.

[UMFan83]

Well it is Miami's first rounder, so it will be very late, and isn't this a very weak class?

 

But still, yeah better than nothing for someone that doesn't play.

Since Toronto got the 1st rounder for Bosh, and they never used it, they essentially traded Bosh for JJ.

 

Didn't Toronto get 2nd pick in that move?

[Flames24Rulz]

Bulls now have 4 first round draft picks in the next two seasons and we have $3 million in cap space to work with. FWIW, Anthony Parker makes $2.86 million.

[Irrelevant Dude]

Bulls now have 4 first round draft picks in the next two seasons and we have $3 million in cap space to work with.

Now all we need is Jerry Angelo to turn those into 8 2nd round picks.

[Tyrant]

Bulls now have 4 first round draft picks in the next two seasons and we have $3 million in cap space to work with.

 

The front office has seemed quietly competent ever since Forman (allegedly) took control from Paxson. Lots of smaller, smart moves like this one.

[17 Seconds]

why isn't anybody talking about the fact that we're probably playing the knicks in the first round and that they just got a top 10 player?