This Old Jersey

Somewhere in the back of my closet is an Allen Iverson blue Sixers road jersey, circa 2003. While I can't imagine a situation where I'd ever wear it again, I also can't fathom throwing it away. You see, that jersey is the only remnant I have left from the Allen Iverson era. Were Iverson's prime years worthy of being an era's namesake? Probably not, but I tend to think so.
In the year 2000, the Bulls were coming off an Eastern Conference worst 17-65 record and were unable to attract any of that offseason's premier free agents. Clearly, they were no good and weren't going to be any good for a long time.
I was in eighth grade an used to a winning basketball team. I grew up with Championships and really didn't appreciate how difficult they were to come by. I decided to invest my rooting interest into Allen Iverson and the 76ers that year. It helped that the 76ers were Championship contenders, but more importantly, Iverson's game was the most intriguing of anyone in the NBA at the time.
He was usually the smallest player on the floor, yet was the most athletic. He was a poor outside shooter, yet led the league in scoring five times. He may have been the most inefficient player of his era, and also one of the greatest. Now that's saying something.
In eighth grade we didn't speak of inefficiency. We preferred a more scathing term: "ball hog." Allen Iverson was a ball hog. I heard that for the entire 20-minute lunch period everytime I wore my Iverson jersey. I began to think my classmates were more enraged with Iverson attempting 30 shots a game than anything else. It didn't matter whether he made 8 or 17 of them. Thirty shots was too many, especially for someone as disliked as Iverson.
His somewhat deserved reputation as a chucker is one of the only aspects about his game people remember. He's more known for one/some or all of the following: cornrows, tattoos, being the main target of the NBA dress code, a high school bowling alley brawl, refusing to accept a bench role towards the end of his career, a homophobic rap song, and of course, "PRACTICE, WE TALKIN' ABOUT PRACTICE, NOT A GAME, NOT A GAME, NOT A GAME, BUT PRACTICE."
Translation: thug, trouble-maker, selfish, bigot, and lazy.
If those are lenses which you choose to view Iverson then that's on you. Many have tried to defend him and are usually unsuccessful because he is such a polarizing figure. If you have an opinion on Allen Iverson, you most likely aren't changing it now.
The point of this post was not to reflect on Iverson's basketball legacy or the legitimacy of the negativity surrounding him. I simply wanted to relate how I remember him, and one image sticks out above the rest.
Game 7 in Philadelphia of the Eastern Conference Finals. The Sixers defeated the Bucks 108-91 to advance to the 2001 NBA Finals. If someone asked me to show them a video that summed up Allen Iverson I wouldn't show them the infamous "Practice" video, or the overrated 1996 Jordan crossover, or one of his 11 career 50-point games. I'd show them Game 7, or as I call it, the perfect actualization of an Iverson-led team.
Iverson poured in 44 points on 17 of 33 shooting, including 4 of 6 from behind the arc. He was only a career 42 percent shooter,  31 percent from three, yet made a variety of difficult outside shots that game. He took is customary plus 30 attempts, but did so efficiently.
In my opinion, the best description of Iverson's game was written by FreeDarko founding member Bethlehem Shoals:

 No player before or since has so sincerely believed in one-on-one basketball as a means to victory, imagining it fully while others had been unwittingly dragged into it by their egos. Iverson wanted the ball in his hands until the last possible second and seemed resistant to the idea that anyone else on his team could implement his plan for a possession.

The 2001 76ers were structured around allowing Iverson to take full control of the offense. Every other player fulfilled their role, which rarely included any input on the offensive end. Aaron McKie guarded the bigger guard, in this case Ray Allen, and fed Iverson the ball coming off screens. McKie finished with 13 assists. Tyrone Hill crashed the boards and scored garbage points. He finished with 11 and 10. Dikembe Mutombo was the heart and soul of the Sixers defense. He owned the paint, grabbed rebounds at will and rejected shots. Mutombo had the game of his life: 23 points, 19 rebounds, and 7 blocks. If you were to draw up a perfect game for a Iverson-led team, this would be it.
With a 18 point lead and just under 40 seconds left, Sixers coach Larry Brown took Iverson out:      



Iverson ran across the court with his hand to his ear, imploring the crowd to raise their decibel level. That's the image I will always remember. At that moment, Iverson was embraced by his teammates, coaches, and the basketball world. A player who was never supposed to sustain any level of team success finally did. The Sixers would go on to shock the Lakers in Game 1 of the Finals, Los Angeles' only loss of the playoffs, but Iverson's Game 7 exit will always be the most memorable moment of his career for me.
When I hear things nowadays that Iverson is broke, gambled away all his money, and watching the All-Star Game alone at the bar, none of it surprises me. People revel in the supposed downfall of former athletes, especially controversial ones like Iverson.
It just seems wrong that Iverson is watching an All-Star Game. He surely would have been voted in again this year. I watched ten minutes of his inaugural game in Turkey and he looked like another average player, trying to make a living playing overseas. I had to turn the game off -- it was that bad.
Allen Iverson's NBA career is over but in those who could appreciate his unorthodox approach to the game, he'll live on. Iverson's impact may get tossed aside, but like my jersey gathering dust, it will always be there -- and that's the important thing.

Big, Imposing Question Marks

Minding my own business a few days ago, I noticed a retweet from someone I was following which read something like this: "1) Rose wins MVP 2) Tibs wins COY 3) Bulls get 1 seed 4) Bulls win finals." The tweet, typed in earnest, was retweeted to mock Bulls fans and their tendency to be "a little" delusional.
But looking at that list, all of those things are possible, right? I've prided myself in remaining, or at least trying to remain rational throughout this season. The last thing I want to do is fall off the wagon now.
Either way, the tweet got me to thinking about the percent chance of each scenario occurring. These numbers are not based on any higher formula, just a simple high or low number used to signify likelihood.
Tom Thibodeau wins Coach of the Year --> 90 Percent. The COY trend is well known by now: give the award to the coach of the league's most improved team. Fresh off of two straight 41 win seasons and low playoff seeds, the Bulls are now in line to secure a Top 3 seed and a win total in the upper-50s. Most people expected the Bulls to improve, but not to the degree they have. A 4 seed and 50 wins seemed about right in preseason, and that was assuming the team would be healthy. Thibs has preached defense since day one and it shows. The Bulls are winning games on the defensive end.
Gregg Popovich is another candidate, but is often overlooked for the honor because the Spurs have been consistently good for so long. I'm not sure a 68 win season would even win him the award this year.
A wild card is first-year 76ers coach Doug Collins. Collins not only has Philadelphia in the playoff hunt, but challenging the Knicks for the sixth spot. In reality, the 76ers are probably the biggest surprise team of the NBA thus far. But a potential sixth seed doesn't compete with a possible one seed and legitimate Finals hopes.
Derrick Rose wins MVP --> 75 Percent. I've been going back and forth with this number. A few days ago I thought it was just right. Today, I feel it might be a little high. For the last month or so the MVP race seemed to be between D. Rose and LeBron. LeBron had the disadvantage of the whole Decision/playing with other superstars thing. Also, like the Spurs, he's so consistently good, we tend to overlook him. Rose seemed to be cast as the anti-LeBron and benefited from the misconception that Chicago would be a 20-win team without him.
But now Dwight Howard has entered the equation. If you're voting for the MVP based on numbers alone, then Howard deserves the award. Since the trade, he's averaging 25 points, 15 rebounds, and 2 blocks a game. All while shooting 61 percent from the field. Even "video-game numbers" would be an inappropriate way to describe that beautiful stat line. Not to mention, Howard has a bigger impact on the defensive end than any other NBA player and is the sole reason Orlando has been a Top 5 defensive team for so long.
That's great, but isn't the MVP a reflection of his team's success to an extent? Orlando is no slouch, they're 38-22. However, here's something I've found interesting. In almost every Boston, Miami, or Chicago playoff article I've read, the writer has mentioned how important it is for BOS/MIA/CHI to secure the one seed, so they don't have to meet up with either BOS/MIA/CHI in the second round. As if Orlando would be an easy out in round 2. They're being completely overlooked and that has to count for something. The MVP is a regular season award, and the MVP should be on an elite team. Even after the trades, no one is buying that Orlando is an elite team.

Bulls win NBA Finals --> 20 Percent. This number is based off of my opinion that there are five legitimate title contenders: San Antonio, LA, Boston, Miami, and Chicago. I have no idea which team to pick. I think all five are equally capable of tearing through the playoffs, and being exploited. 20 percent is my way of saying the Bulls are one of five teams, and I don't think any team is the favorite.
The Bulls are 5-3 against these teams, with a losing record only against Boston (1-2). They have the size to match up with Boston and LA, the athleticism to hang with Miami, and the defensive prowess to contain San Antonio. It would help though, if they could win this upcoming game against Miami, and secure at least one road win against an elite team.
Bulls earn the 1 Seed --> 15 percent. If the Bulls were to procure the number one seed in the East, they'd need two things to happen:
1) Boston to lose in Chicago and Miami, in addition to blowing a few "gimme" road games. The Celtics have the fifth highest road winning percentage in the NBA.
2) Miami needs to continue their futility against good teams and lose at least half of their next ten games.
Here's the breakdown:

CELTICS 43-15
12 of 24 remaining games against playoff teams
13 Road Games
@Chicago, @Miami

HEAT 43-17
13 of 22 remaining games against playoff teams
9 Road Games
vs. Chicago, vs. Boston

BULLS 41-17
12 of 24 remaining games against playoff teams
13 Road Games
@Miami, vs. Boston

The Heat have the most intriguing race to the 1 seed. Their next ten games are against playoff teams. They have a combined 6-6 record against those teams, plus two meetings with San Antonio, who they haven't played yet. This ten game stretch will make or break their chances of grabbing the top seed. They play 8 of these 10 games at home. If the Heat can come away with 7 or 8 wins in that stretch, they should set themselves up nicely for a push towards the one seed.
The Celtics currently hold a one game advantage over Miami, and two games over Chicago. While they have Jeff Green and Nenad Krstic to incorporate into the system, the core of their team has been together for the last four years. They're a veteran team and, I hate this cliche but, know what it takes to win.
Here's something else the Boston Celtics know: the Chicago Bulls are the only Eastern Conference team that can beat them in a seven game series. I believe wholeheartedly that they're terrified of facing the Bulls in the playoffs. That will be motivation enough to focus on the top spot and hope the Heat can knock the Bulls off. If they have to play the Bulls in the EC Finals, they do so knowing they have home court advantage against a team with limited postseason experience that has played poorly on the road this year.
The Celtics know this is probably their last stand. No way I see them loosening the reins and letting the one seed slip away.
I'm still concerned about the Bulls' propensity to lose on the road and play down to inferior competition. The good news is that they finally have their full team healthy. Perhaps having everyone back will instill a focus in them. Regardless, the Bulls are the dark horse to grab the one seed, and whether they do or not, will likely have the most momentum heading into the playoffs.
A few months from now, we'll have the answers to all of these questions. I'm 100 percent sure of that.

Bulls Do The Right Thing By Standing Pat

If Carmelo Anthony felt right patting himself on the back for dealing with a four-month trade saga that he himself created, then I feel I should at least give myself a well-deserved pat on the back for firmly standing by this current Bulls roster. Seemingly everyone wanted a trade before the deadline, even if that meant dealing one of our valuable back-up bigs, Taj Gibson or Omer Asik.
In an attempt to avoid giving up a big, the Bulls reportedly offered Ronnie Brewer, two first round picks and a second rounder for OJ Mayo, but the Grizzlies declined.
So there's that. I was and am OK with this roster without a trade or buyout pick-up. But I'm definitely not mad the Bulls front office went out and tried to make the team better. They didn't make a trade for the sake of making a trade, which is always good. They also didn't get rid of Asik, which, if my opinion mattered, would have been priority number one.
Asik is making 1.7 million this year and is set to make 1.8 million next year. For the amount of money he is making it's not out of line to say he's one of the biggest steals in the league this year. The Rockets realized this and were hoping the Bulls would make the deal out of desperation. Look no further than yesterday's Heat game to understand the impact that Asik is capable of off the bench. Sure, we can look at the box score and see he pulled down 11 rebounds and blocked a shot in only 21 minutes of play. That's impressive enough as it is.
But the box doesn't tell the story with Asik. Similar to Noah, he protects the rim and is able to alter a number of shots. This is particularly valuable against a team like the Heat. LeBron and Wade can get to the rim at will. They did against us and shot 18 combined free throws (a relatively low number for them).
When Noah was out the Bulls struggled to keep the oppositon out of the paint. Boozer and Thomas aren't shot blocking threats, and were most recently exposed in Toronto. Noah in the starting line-up and Asik off the bench will assure there's always a shot blocker down low. The Heat structure their line-up around being able to sit Wade and LeBron at different times, so one can always be on the court. If we're going to beat them in a seven game series, we're going to need someone at all times who can at least make life tough for them down low.
Courtney Lee's ability to hit the occasional three wouldn't be anywhere near as valuable as Asik's defense for the Bulls. Give me good defense over good offense anyday. I'm really happy they didn't pull the trigger on that deal.
Ronnie Brewer also came in and provided a spark. He has very active hands and is usually able to come up with one or two steals a game from pick-pocketing players lazily holding the ball in front of them. Brewer came up with four steals in the Heat game, three of which were crucial towards the Bulls' second half run.
Brewer receives credit for hovering around the baseline very well, but doesn't nearly get recognized for his improved jumper. He's been hitting 15 footers frequently this year, and is now a legitimate threat from that range. A year ago that last sentence seemed inconceivable. But more importantly, Brewer is an energy guy. He gets most of his points when he runs the floor or off easy put backs. Every team needs someone who can play around 20 minutes a game and go all out. Brewer is another guy who is more valuable that his stats indicate.
The trade deadline has come and gone and the original Bulls roster remains intact. The Bulls will likely explore buyout options, but the important thing is they didn't have to give up an asset to get one. This year in the NBA has been characterized by change. So many players have moved around, especially lately, that standing pat almost seems like an invitation to get passed by. The Bulls did the right thing. They have a roster that can compete for a championship right now. There's no use in tuning up a vehicle that doesn't need one.
Now if someone could please remove my hand from my back.

"Frederic Weis," or "The Guy Vince Carter Dunked Over"

Timofey Mozgov's name has come up a lot this week. The Knicks were reluctant to part with the 7'1 Russian center, but eventually caved under the pressure of acquiring Carmelo Anthony just before the trade deadline. Mozgov may develop into a great player one day, but he will always be remembered for that one fateful second in which he tried to stand up to Blake Griffin. Griffin left the floor, curled his left arm around the back of Mozgov's head, and proceeded to direct it towards his groin area. All while throwing down a ferocious slam.
No matter what Mozgov accomplishes in the NBA, that will be his legacy. The first and probably not last person to get Blake Griffin's nuts planted squarely in his face.
Frederic Weis, the 7'2 French center, received a similarly embarrassing fate in the 2000 Olympics (shown above). Fortunately for Weis, this came before the "instant news" era of the Internet and at least saved his name from being remembered infamously. Instead, we got to see the Vince Carter's dunk on every Sportscenter highlight reel of the summer over "some 7'2 French guy."
Interestingly enough, Weis was actually drafted 15th overall in the 1999 draft by the Knicks the summer before the Olympics. He underwent back surgery before getting drafted and credits his injuries as the reason why he never made it to the NBA. The Knicks traded Weis' rights to the Rockets in 2008 for no other than Patrick Ewing, Jr. Who says the Knicks were irrelevant the last decade?
Weis peaked in 1999 with French club Limoges, averaging 13 points and 7 rebounds a game. He was priased for his good hands and footwork, and was thought to be the second coming of Zydrunas Ilgauskus.
Weis had played professionaly for five years with Limoges before being selected by the Knicks, and then opted for a year of basketball in Greece instead of the NBA. He spent the last decade playing basketball professionaly in Spain, and has returned to Limoges to play this year.
Weis isn't much of a factor anymore, playing only 12 minutes a game and averaging a paltry 1.8 points per game. He's 33 years old and likely near the end of his career.
When asked in 2005 if being remembered for the Vince Carter dunk bothered him, he responded, "Why? I didn't do anything. It was just him doing something incredible. I can only imagine...If he jumped over me, he can jump over anybody! If people laugh, I laugh too. At least I can say I once played against him."
Isn't that a great attitude to have? It's not that Weis was bad, Carter was just that good. There's only so many special talents out there, the rest of us are either witnesses, or in the way.
I'm interested in hearing what Mozgov has to say about Griffin's dunk in ten years.

Some Scattered Melo Thoughts

Carmelo Anthony's year-long trade saga had been dubbed "The Melo-Drama," mainly because it needed a flashy title to save it from an otherwise predictable result. That's not to say this horse and pony show didn't have melodramatic tendencies. The way Melo has handled his impending free agency is far less exception than the rule, with Lockout Summer, coming this July, approaching fast.
What bothered me about this entire situation is how forced it seemed, lending credence to its title. It's like watching a movie when you already know the ending. The apparent twists and turns aren't nearly as exciting when you know that road is in fact a dead end, and not an intersection.
For all the hate The Decision has received, and deservedly so, it was still a landmark NBA moment. While ESPN was reporting all morning that LeBron was going to the Heat, it still seemed a little too unbelievable. I have no doubt in my mind that every Bulls, Knicks, Cavs, and Heat fan watched The Decision with a bit of nervous energy. Sure, we all were supposed to know LeBron was going to the Heat, but there wasn't the 100 percent certainty of Melo to the Knicks. For that reason, among many other more important ones, The Decision was significant. It was proper dramatic conclusion to the 2010 free agency period. The Melo-drama just wasn't interesting, and maybe it wasn't meant to be. Carmelo isn't the player LeBron is, and probably didn't deserve that type of attention anyway.
I've heard two angles on this story come up more than any other. The first being that Melo's move represents the eventual doom of the small-market club, and the second being that the Knicks still aren't title contenders. To the latter, I say, "Duh!" Despite the buzz around the trade, Melo's acquisition was was a means to an end for the Knicks, rather than the end. This trade wasn't meant to make them contenders today. In fact, it's unclear if they're even a better team today than they were yesterday. The Knicks hope to add either Chris Paul or Deron Williams in 2012, assuming the new CBA makes that possible. Basically, the Knicks took a chance. Some people agree with taking chances and others don't.
Seeing as I root for a big-market team I may be a bit biased, but I think LeBron, Carmelo, and Co.'s relocations aren't motivated solely by playing in big markets. Miami isn't even a big market, but does have an advantage over other cities because it is a desirable place to live. Miami was a unique situation because it was three guys who wanted to play with each other. Miami was the only place able to make that happen in 2011.
Big-market Chicago had the best nucleus of any major free-agent player this summer and didn't even come away with a top 5 free agent. I think, more so than anything, an organization that drafts well and has built a team capable of contending will attract big and small-name free agents, regardless of where the team is located. The Nuggets drafted Carmelo and built their team around him. They made some mistakes along the way, but I think most can agree, although they probably weren't going to win a title, they were capable of making a playoff push and failed to do so. The problem here could be Melo, not the Nuggets organization or the city of Denver. I'm not buying the "death of the small market" argument. If Carmelo can't get it done as the centerpiece in Denver and thinks things will change in New York, then he was probably worth getting rid of.

Despite the saltiness of Denver and other small markets, the NBA is better off with Melo in New York. Madison Square Garden has been called The Mecca of Basketball since before I was born. The Knicks franchise has won two NBA Championships, tied for 8th most in NBA history. The "Mecca" title has long been ridiculous. But ridiculous or not, it still exists, and we can't deny that great players have elevated their game when playing against the Knicks in Madison Square Garden.
The Knicks aren't perennial losers anymore, even though they haven't won a ring since 1973. Melo's acquisition alone gives us the impression that they've won something on the court, even though they haven't. Look at the Heat. It seems that most team's fan bases get more joy out of beating them than the Lakers or Celtics. The same will happen to the Knicks, and the undeserving cloud of importance that constantly surrounds them will at least by somewhat justified. The NBA will be more fun this way. Trust me.
Not to mention, the Eastern Conference playoffs will be...well...indescribable. I've long maintained that the Celtics, Heat, and Bulls are the only true contenders in the East and I stand by that. But just looking at the potential first round match ups, there won't be an easy series for any team. Regardless of what team I root for, that's what I want to see. That's one of the reasons I like this trade. It brings some much needed excitement to an Eastern Conference, that save for a team or two, has been absolutely mind-numbingly boring the last decade.

The Derrick Rose Wars

On the eve of his 42-point explosion against the Spurs Thursday night, Derrick Rose had received quite a bit of criticism. Complaints ranged from his efficiency, to style of play, to MVP credentials. Some of it was warranted, some wasn't. None of this is out of the ordinary. When any player elevates his game into the upper echelon of his position like Rose has this year, it's natural to start comparing that player to his contemporaries. It's also natural to start picking apart his flaws and determining what he needs to do to surpass his contemporaries or stay at the top.
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.

The Case For Keith Bogans

Bulls fans are spoiled. As if six championships in the 90s and watching the greatest player ever wasn't enough, all I've been hearing for the last three months is the Bulls need to upgrade the shooting guard position. As if a 37-16 record without a full roster, and one game left before the All-Star break wasn't enough. We need to get better! And the only way is to get another shooting guard, anyone except Bogans. Rip Hamilton, Stephen Jackson, JR Smith, Arron Afflalo, Anthony Parker, Courtney Lee, OJ Mayo--ANYONE.
Derrick Rose can't just be considered one of the best point guards in the game, he has to be considered the best. Derrick Rose can't just be an MVP candidate, he has to be the MVP favorite. The Bulls can't just have one All-Star, they need at least two.
More. More More. Nothing has been good enough this year, has it Bulls fans?
I understand that the last 12 seasons have been tortuous, mixed with a little good here and there. It was fun watching Elton Brand compete with some pitiful Bulls teams early in his career. The 2007 playoffs in which we swept the defending champion Heat in the first round, and battled back from a 3-0 series deficit to take the Pistons to six was memorable, and left many of us foolishly thinking the Bulls had turned the corner. The 2009 first round series with Boston was quite possibly the greatest playoff series ever and best Chicago Bulls moment of the last 12 years--even though we didn't win that series.
I also understand the Miami Heat have created an "arms-race" mentality in the NBA. Three big names teamed up in Miami and the same will probably happen in New York. The Celtics already have their Big Three, now Big Four. Conventional thinking then says that in order to keep up with these teams, you need to stockpile the biggest names and most talent. This line of thinking is true to an extent, but disregards the issue of chemistry and a player's willingness to adapt to a certain role.
That's why I'll take Keith Bogans over any of the players I just mentioned above. He plays great defense and is rarely caught out of position. He's never once tried to do too much on the offensive or defensive end. Ask yourself if any of the above players be content with six shots a game? I doubt it, and that's twice the amount of shots Bogans takes per game. I'd rather not deny Rose the ball if it means the shooting guard replacement needs more shots.
The biggest critique of Bogans is that he doesn't score enough. On the surface, it's hard to argue with that. He averages 3.9 points per game. But lets look at this scoring "conundrum" a little closer.
With Noah back, the Bulls will average about 80 points per game from their starters, tied for the fourth highest total in the NBA. The only teams higher are the Knicks (85), Warriors (82), and Heat (81). The Knicks and Warriors push the ball up the court, take quick shots, and play very little defense. They also have thin benches. Their teams philosophies are perfectly suited to scoring a lot of points. I know, they're a combined 3-1 against the Bulls, but neither are championship contenders and wouldn't beat the Bulls in a seven game series. The Heat have the two best players in the NBA, who combine for 52 of those 81 points. In comparison, the Bulls' top two scorers, Rose and Boozer, combine for 44.
Hopefully, my point about Bulls fans being spoiled is starting to get clearer. How many points do they expect the starters to score? The fans seem to think we should be able to add a 12-14 point per game scorer to the starting lineup. If we did that, we'd not only have a starting lineup that averages more than 90 points per game, but outscores the 2nd highest scoring lineup by 7 or 8 points a game.
The average NBA team gets 70 points per game out of their starting lineup. The Bulls get 80, but the fans want over 90. Ludicrous!
Let's also acknowledge that Bogans has been shooting the ball much better of late. In the first 31 games of the season, he shot 37 percent from behind the arc, in line with his career average. In the last 22 games, he's shot the three-pointer at a 47 percent clip. How about the a happy medium, 42 percent? I think that's more than doable, considering nearly every Bogans three pointer is uncontested. He's seeing more wide open looks than he ever has in his career. A five percent increase from his career three-point shooting percentage isn't out of the question.
72 percent of Bogans' field goal attempts are threes, a number that I'd like to see closer to 80. He only attempts 2.5 shots per game, so the lack of scoring isn't his fault. There's simply not enough shots to go around, which is why it would be ridiculous to think a starting lineup could average over 90 points a game. If Bogans took even six shots a game, he'd be averaging 6 or 7 points, a number that is well in line with most fourth or fifth options. There's always going to be an odd man out and Bogans is that man. Why he's being criticized for it, I have no idea.
The Bulls have never won or lost a game because of Keith Bogans. They won't win or lose a game because of his potential replacement. We're good enough to contend with the team we have right now. It's been 12 rough years for God's sake. Stop trying to act spoiled now.