2011 Chicago Bulls Playoff Thread (5/26 7:30pm CST - TNT)

[Banedon]

“It’s not broken, so I’m definitely playing,” said Rose. “It’s the playoffs. The only thing you can do is take a shot and see how it feels.

 

“After I take the shot, I shouldn’t feel anything, so hopefully I can go out there and perform,” he continued. “It’s getting better every day. I’ve been getting treatment on it the last couple of days. Hopefully, it’ll be ready [Tuesday].”

[Flames24Rulz]

He was definitely walking with a bad limp yesterday when they showed him on CSN last night.

 

Hopefully that painkiller does the trick.

[Old Style]

please pound the pacers and have the orlando/atlanta series go 7, thanks god

 

I'd rather face ATL after 5 than ORL after 7.

[CubColtPacer]

“It’s not broken, so I’m definitely playing,” said Rose. “It’s the playoffs. The only thing you can do is take a shot and see how it feels.

 

“After I take the shot, I shouldn’t feel anything, so hopefully I can go out there and perform,” he continued. “It’s getting better every day. I’ve been getting treatment on it the last couple of days. Hopefully, it’ll be ready [Tuesday].”

 

Interesting to see that both starting point guards have sprained ankles. Hopefully they'll both be able to go at near their full strength tonight.

[bukie]

Just win tonight, and I'm pretty sure the NBA will hold off on starting the second round until at least most of the first is over, even if matchups are all set in the East.

[Soul]

Just win tonight so we can move on. It's time to move on. Edited April 26, 2011 by Soul

[Banedon]

Just win tonight, and I'm pretty sure the NBA will hold off on starting the second round until at least most of the first is over, even if matchups are all set in the East.

 

Yeah...I don't think they want one conference getting ahead of the other.

[UMFan83]

Just win tonight, and I'm pretty sure the NBA will hold off on starting the second round until at least most of the first is over, even if matchups are all set in the East.

 

The earliest the 2nd round would start is Saturday or Sunday. They sometimes start round 2 on the same day as the last round 1 series are wrapping up.

[bukie]

Time for the Bulls to stop playing a weird game of "up the ante" and play well.

 

Game 1: Can the Bulls win without a good defensive effort? Yes, if they rebound and play well offensively

Game 2: Can the Bulls win without a good offensive effort? Yes, if they play defense, rebound, and Rose does well offensively.

Game 3: Can the Bulls win without a good offense while being outrebounded, committing double the turnovers and without Rose hitting shots? Yes, if they play defense, Rose hits foul shots, and Korver shoots well.

Game 4: Can the Buls win without a good offense while being outrebounded, committing double the turnovers, allowing more foul shots, with an injured Rose and without Korver hitting shots? No, but they were a Boozer 3 away.

[wolf stansson]

This is just a bad matchup. Pacers bigs not allowing Bulls bigs to establish position on the block, thus it takes too long to set up primary offense as well as making entry passes almost impossible. One thing the Pacers do have in abundance is a strong, active front court. We'll beat them tonight and even though it didn't seem dominant, we still won in 5 which is exactly what most people thought. Not too bad. As long as the ankle isn't a lingering issue for Derrick, this is still the same team that had as good a chance as anyone to win the title.

 

From twitter:

@KCJHoop DRose on his ankle: "It's good. Yesterday, it was a little stiff. Today, I have more motion in it."

[Banedon]

Yeah, it's weird to say, but I think the Bulls will be able to play their style of ball better against other (better) teams than the Pacers.

[Soul]

It's a bad matchup but we won 3 games with it.

 

Sure, we have some difficulties but they can be overcome, and we can still win.

 

The ultimate bad matchup is Rose vs. anyone on the Pacers team. And that one favors the Bulls.

[imb]

phenomenal take

[CubColtPacer]

Yeah, it's weird to say, but I think the Bulls will be able to play their style of ball better against other (better) teams than the Pacers.

 

I agree (which is part of the reason that the Granger comments at the beginning of the series are ringing true). The Pacers have 2 defenders that can do a decent job on Rose 1 on 1 (although they didn't figure that out and have George and Jones be the primary defenders until game 2 or 3) and have long and active arms inside. That's not a combination that most teams have. The Bulls haven't been able to take advantage of the Pacers big defensive weakness (the size of the point guards) because Bogans is not that type of player. And on the other side of the ball, the Pacers emphasize interior passing which is a better way to break down the Bulls then trying to drive and kick all day long.

 

Plus the Pacers have played more consistently in this series than they have all season. If the Pacers could have played like this for most of the season they would have been at least the 6 seed and not the 8 seed and the Bulls struggling against them wouldn't look nearly as bad. The Bulls will be fine in the next series.

[SouthSideRyan]

phenomenal take

 

QUITE FRANKLY that's all you need.

[wolf stansson]

Sure, we have some difficulties but they can be overcome, and we can still win.

Dropping some Churchill in the B-Ball thread. Nice.

[Exile on Waveland]

This is just a bad matchup. Pacers bigs not allowing Bulls bigs to establish position on the block, thus it takes too long to set up primary offense as well as making entry passes almost impossible. One thing the Pacers do have in abundance is a strong, active front court. We'll beat them tonight and even though it didn't seem dominant, we still won in 5 which is exactly what most people thought. Not too bad. As long as the ankle isn't a lingering issue for Derrick, this is still the same team that had as good a chance as anyone to win the title.

 

From twitter:

@KCJHoop DRose on his ankle: "It's good. Yesterday, it was a little stiff. Today, I have more motion in it."

 

Really? Most people thought this was a five-game series and not a sweep? I'm thinking that's some revisionist history.

[Banedon]

You're really gonna pick that fight? I don't think anybody has detailed records on what "most people" think. Lets say "most people thought it would be a four or five game series." I think we can safely agree on that.

[wolf stansson]

You're really gonna pick that fight? I don't think anybody has detailed records on what "most people" think. Lets say "most people thought it would be a four or five game series." I think we can safely agree on that.

Right. Even if everyone in the world predicted a sweep, a one-game differential isn't far off enough to worry about their performance.

[Tyrant]

From @MikeWellsNBA

 

Vogel: "If we win tonight we'll win the series."

 

http://twitter.com/#!/MikeWellsNBA/status/62928720058531840

[UMFan83]

From @MikeWellsNBA

 

Vogel: "If we win tonight we'll win the series."

 

http://twitter.com/#!/MikeWellsNBA/status/62928720058531840

 

lol

[SouthSideRyan]

"If we win tonight, we'll probably still lose in 6" doesn't quite have the same effect as far as rallying the troops.

[Exile on Waveland]

You're really gonna pick that fight? I don't think anybody has detailed records on what "most people" think. Lets say "most people thought it would be a four or five game series." I think we can safely agree on that.

 

Sure. Most people thought it would be a four or five game series -- but that's a different statement than most people thought it would be a five game series. I don't believe that's true at all; it was a 62-win team against a 37-win team. I don't really need "detailed records," just go back through the threads. Bulls fans were entirely dismissive of the Pacers, to the point most believed it wouldn't be a competitive series at all (though, certainly, the Pacers had ostensibly no chance to actually win the series). That statement/belief is more rank homerism: "well, we knew the Pacers were good and would give us all we could handle, this was expected." Yeah. Freakin'. Right.

 

Of course, I know the only reason the Pacers have won once is that the NBA officials were incredibly biased in favor of the small market team with no stars. So the Pacers didn't really win one game.

[ChiCubsFan]

Please just stop [expletive] around and win by 30. It's annoying that Vogel even thinks his team has a chance.

[Banedon]

You're really gonna pick that fight? I don't think anybody has detailed records on what "most people" think. Lets say "most people thought it would be a four or five game series." I think we can safely agree on that.

 

Sure. Most people thought it would be a four or five game series -- but that's a different statement than most people thought it would be a five game series. I don't believe that's true at all; it was a 62-win team against a 37-win team. I don't really need "detailed records," just go back through the threads. Bulls fans were entirely dismissive of the Pacers, to the point most believed it wouldn't be a competitive series at all (though, certainly, the Pacers had ostensibly no chance to actually win the series). That statement/belief is more rank homerism: "well, we knew the Pacers were good and would give us all we could handle, this was expected." Yeah. Freakin'. Right.

 

Of course, I know the only reason the Pacers have won once is that the NBA officials were incredibly biased in favor of the small market team with no stars. So the Pacers didn't really win one game.

 

You want to get some love for your team...I get it. That's cool. The Pacers have exceeded playoff expectations. There ya go. Nobody is saying differently. Yay Pacers!