What has struck me the most is the lengths Rose/Bulls fans have gone to shoot down even the slightest negative energy directed towards him. You would think some of these Rose critics were trying to rewrite the Bill of Rights, or something, with the way they've been treated. It's not that I'm above the typical Bulls fan. I'm right there with them. I think Rose is the MVP too. I think he's having the best season of any point guard, and is playing like a Top 5 player in the NBA. I also understand how and why some people would think otherwise.
But why is Rose being defended so passionately? I think it has to do with a fundamental misunderstanding of what he's being criticized for. Rose's game and demeanor have become one in the same. This probably doesn't make sense. I think with the help of Rose's latest Adidas ad, it will.
"I'm quiet. Don't have to shout. Don't need to bark, run my gums, or talk smack. Don't need to drop a hot track for you to understand what I'm saying. Don't have to say a word, because I'm fast. I'm D. Rose, and fast don't lie."
Adidas has pulled off something pretty amazing with this ad. They've essentially taken Rose's demeanor (quiet, humble, contained -- all unmarketable qualities) and turned them into marketing assets. The only physical attribute of his they've focused on is his speed. Speed helps, but it certainly doesn't make one a good basketball player. We're left to think that it is Rose's focused and relentless attitude that makes him such a good player.
Now think back to some of Rose's nationally televised games. The first thing an announcer usually points out is that he's from Chicago, quiet, humble, and willing to learn. Again, all admirable qualities, but not necessarily ones that translate to success on the court. But that's the problem. Rose's demeanor is brought up so often, that it's looked at as a basketball skill, in the same way the ball handling or footwork is.
I think that's where some of this confusion sets in. If you're criticizing Rose's game, does that mean you're criticizing him as a person? I know this sounds kind of ridiculous, but consider the lengths people have gone to defend him. Good players are criticized all the time. But never have I seen a fanbase so desperate for a player to be acknowledged as great.
Rose is the perfectly molded athlete. A player who not only has elite skills, but is willing to put the work in to get better, treat his less talented teammates as equals, and pick the brain of any and every member of the Bulls organization.
It's easy to forget now that the Bulls were considered losers in the 2010 Summer free agency period. They had their sights set on a combination of Bosh and either LeBron or Wade. They got none of them and instead had to settle on Boozer and a variety of role players. Rose reacted exactly how you'd hope your star player would. He didn't care. He took what the Bulls had and made them into a contender. Perfect.
There's no clear distinction between Derrick Rose the person and Derrick Rose the player. Yesterday, the TNT crew argued about whether DeMarcus Cousins was a knucklehead or did "knucklehead things." Ernie Johnson argued that the "knucklehead things" Cousins has done in his young career don't define him as a basketball player. It's the opposite with Rose. His quiet and humble nature have been packaged as an integral part of his game.
Bulls fans like to think Rose has done things the right way. Some people think of him as the anti-LeBron. In a round-about way, an endorsement for Rose is an endorsement for the so-called good guys in the league. Or maybe that's just my warped, misguided view of the Derrick Rose wars.
No comments:
Post a Comment