Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: bulls91 Jul 24 2006, 10:50 PM

i was just looking at the bulls roster i think that we are deep at all positions with very good talent at every position at least 2 deep. look

PG Hinrich, Duhon, Sefolosha
SG Gordon, Sefolosha, Griffin
SF Deng, Nocioni, Khyrapa, Griffin
PF Brown, Nocioni, Thomas, Allen
C Wallace, Sweetney, Brown

all has really good talent that will give thomas time to develope and gain weight with not much pressure on him but will get some minutes.

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 25 2006, 12:54 AM

Hard to predict the minute sharing with all the depth we have. That almost sounds like a good thing to me, play your main guys 35 in the tough ones, the other nights we can cruise with a lockdown D team for an entire half. I know I'm probably in the minority here, but I see Allen picking up the majority of Ben's bench minutes, he could see just under 10 or so a night there. Like I said in the "starting PF" thread, we are going to have a lot of different options down low, give teams a bunch of different looks, and dictate the way they match-up against us.

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 25 2006, 01:58 AM

This team reminds me of the Kings of a few years ago. Very deep and a great mix of veterans and youngsters.

You've got your defensive stopper in Wallace (Christie), your court captain in Hinrich (Bibby), your veteran leaders in Brown and Griffin (Divac and Jackson), your sharpshooter in Gordon (Stojakovic), your versatile back-up big man in Sweetney (Miller), your wiley 6th man in Nocioni (Turkoglu), but the only thing missing is your go-to, low post scorer. Who is going to be out Chris Webber?

Posted by: Iguana Jul 25 2006, 07:52 AM

Sounds like a job for Luke Schenscher !! LOL

(hey mods, when I click on the smilies, it comes up as File Not Found. Odd...)

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 25 2006, 10:59 AM

Problem was, even with Webber that team came up short. We have Nocioni and Deng, whichever is on the bench I think that our bench is still a lot stronger then the Kings.

2001-2002 when they went to the conference finals this was their bench.

31 Scot Pollard F - C 211 120 27 1975 5 19-97
51 Lawrence Funderburke PF 206 104 32 1970 5 51-94
5 Hidayet Turkoglu SF 203 100 23 1979 2 16-00
3 Gerald Wallace SF 201 97 20 1982 1 25-01
24 Bobby Jackson PG 185 84 29 1973 5 23-97
52 Chucky Brown SF 203 100 34 1968 13 43-89
8 Mateen Cleaves PG 188 93 25 1977 2 14-00
25 Brent Price PG 185 84 34 1968 9 32-92

Although Wallace is a great player now he didn't much playing time for the Kings back then. Turkoglu and Jackson are good bench players and some might even argue that Jackson was even good enough to be a starter on most teams.

But the same can be said of Nocioni/Deng. Duhon is also good bench player. Add Sefolosha to the mix and Sweetney and I have to say that our bench is a step or two better then the Kings.

The fact remains that the Kings didn't play defense. Other then Christie the team was aweful defensively. So I think that pretty much takes away at least half of Webber's offensive production because the team gave up just as many easy points as he scored for them. Add the difference in our bench and I think we could put up a similar record and make a serious push in the playoffs (the same way the Kings did). However, when the game is on the line it would be nice to have a power forward who can play the screen and role and hit the 18 ft. jump shot with consistency. Same can be said of having a gaurd that can do the same. Bibby made just about every jumper off of screens that Webber set. I don't think that is something that either Gordon or Hinrich can do consistently. Ben Gordon's the best finisher on the Bulls but sometimes it is hard to get him the ball or for him to get a good look when someone is guarding him.

I think until we get that scoring big man whether it be a center or power forward, I don't think this team will be able to win it all. I hope I am wrong but if you look at the last 8 championships they have all had a low post threat. But the team to last win without an all-star caliber low post threat was the Bulls. Luc Longley was decent but far from being an all-star. That being said he was still better offensively then any big man we currently have.

Last 8 titles
Shaq - 4
Duncan -3
Rasheed Wallace - 1

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 25 2006, 11:08 AM

They got away with it because Jordan was one of the best offensive post players in the league, he absolutely destroyed people with his turnaround. His career FG% was 49.7, which is pretty ridiculous for a guard.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 25 2006, 12:35 PM

Don't forget about Pippen who was better then anyone on the Bulls right now.

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 25 2006, 01:30 PM

To say the Bulls bench is better than the Kings bench was is asinine IMO. That Kings team made the playoffs like 5-6 years in a row and made the conference finals twice I believe. And if it wasn't for Robert Horry and a lucky ass 3 at the buzzer, the Kings would have been in the Finals, and likely would have won.

That team was always hampered with injuries. Webber was always down, Stojakovic had problems, etc.

As far as the bench, they had veterans who knew about winning and they had the best 6th man in the league in Bobby Jackson. The Bulls have done nothing to show me that they are a better Bench than those Kings. Pollard and Funderburke are beter than Schencher and Sweetney.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 25 2006, 02:44 PM

Well, Pippen was also a factor with his high FG%, but he didn't really do any damage in the post, which is what I was commenting on.

Posted by: RememberThe90's Jul 25 2006, 08:27 PM

I really don't even see Schencher making the team.

**crosses fingers**

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 25 2006, 10:00 PM

First of all don't say my opinion is asinine when you specifically wanted me to stop making criticism of other people's ideas. 2nd as you read in my previous post I did acknowledge that the Kings did make it to the conference finals, and I did acknowledge that Bobby Jackson was good enough to start on most teams in the league. So that takes away from two of your arguements. As for the rest the Kings won primarily because of Bibby and Webber in those playoff games. Their starting 5 carried them through the playoffs with the exception of Turkoglu and Jackson stepping in. I remember countless times seeing Webber set the screen and Bibby knocking down the shot or Webber getting the pass and hitting the jumper. They had a 2 man game going on for much of each 4th quarter. They lost because of Horry but that doesn't mean their bench is better then the Bulls.

2nd don't question my post because it makes complete sense. And if before wasn't good enough here is more proof.

Pollard 6.4 pts, 7.1 rebs, 55% fg, 69% ft (in 23 minutes)
Jackson 11.1 pts, 2 asst, 36 % 3 pt (22 minutes)
Turkoglu 10.1 pts, 2 asst, 37% 3pt (25 minutes)
(the next guy in terms of production was Funderburke)
Funderburke 4.7 pts, 3.5 rebs (13 minutes)

Now to say the Bulls bench this year doesn't compare or isn't better is asinine. The Kings had 2 legitimate bench players and a few role guys. The Bulls have 4 plus legit bench players. (Sweetney, Sefolosha, Duhon and either Nocioni or Deng)(this doesn't include Thomas because I don't think he will make much impact in his rookie campaign. But then again who knows?). I take those four over the four listed above.

Either Deng or Nocioni is a bench player (however you want to view it)

Deng 14.3 pts, 6.6 rebs (33 minutes)
Nocioni 13 pts, 6.1 rebs (27 minutes)
Sweetney 8.1 pts, 5.3 rebs (18.5 minutes)
Sefolosha (to be seen) (probably something like this 9 pts, 5 reb, 2 stl, 1 blk in 23-25 minutes)
Duhon 8.7 pts, 5 asst, 1 stl (29 minutes)

Now tell me again why my idea was so asinine!

(I also would rather have Sweetney who has a legitimate low post game instead of Pollard. And look his offensive production was better in less minutes). The Bulls have a good back-up at every spot on the floor.

Looking back at the list of names on the Kings bench if they all were there in their prime then no doubt their bench would have been better. Chucky Atkins, Gerald Wallace, Turkoglu, Jackson and Pollard. That is a sick lineup and would even have been good enough to beat the Bobcats a few years ago. That being said the only players at the time who were at a stage in their career to significantly produce wre Turkoglu and Jackson. The Bulls have 4 or more players who can come off the bench and be contributors or who can legitimately fill in as starters when other players miss a game.

Posted by: |DaBulls| Jul 25 2006, 10:29 PM

so, what type of food does this depth roaster roast?

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 25 2006, 11:03 PM

My opinion is that your opninion was asinine. Big deal. I don't know why you're getting all personal.

Anyways, the only reason the Bulls players have better stats is because the Kings essentially had an 8 man rotation, as to where the Bulls had all 12 guys play in almost every game. Majority of games (especially in the playoffs) the Kings had a starting line up of Bibby, Christie, Stojakovic, Webber, and Divac and brought Jackson, Turkoglu, and Pollard. And BTW, Pollard didn'y score much because the Kings didn't run there offense with the center being a scoring threat. The Center's were always there to set picks, pass, and rebound. Divac was the best passing Center the game has ever seen, and the offense was run perfect with him in there.

And to add, you can't assume Sefolosha will have good numbers. Neither Tyrus nor Thabo have done anything to prove they will be legitimate NBA players. I fully expect Thabo to be just that, but he has to prove it. Besides, all this is moot until we seen the team on the court.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 25 2006, 11:11 PM

Those numbers seem a bit high outside of Nocioni. With the additions we have made, probably only Nocioni sees as many minutes as he did last year. There will be fewer minutes to go around, meaning the numbers go down. Plus as much as we like Sef, that's pretty optomistic. Think about it, the math won't allow those guys to all play that much. Let's see what we come up with making some assumptions on minutes for our key guys:

post- There are only two post spots, which means there are 96 minutes to go around. 35 or so go to Wallace, around 30 to Brown, let's just say 10 for Nocioni (that might even be a little low). That only leaves 21 minutes total for Sweetney, Thomas, and whomever else we have down there.

SF- Even assuming he plays some 2-guard, it's at least 28 a game for Deng here, and another 17 or so for Nocioni. That leaves only about 3 minutes at SF for Griffin, or maybe playing Sef or Gordon here in a 3-guard look occasionally.

SG- Gordon plays at least 30 a game, probably more. Sef probably gets another 10 to 15. That leaves 8 minutes max for Griffin or possibly another PG.

PG- Hinrich plays 35 a game. Let's just assume 10 for Duhon. Sef gets what's left.

So unless one of the key guys plays less (only one I can see is Brown), Sweetney's absolute tops is about 15 minutes, Sefolosha's is about 20, and Duhon's is under 15. It'd be very difficult for those guys to put up solid numbers with that little playing time.

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 25 2006, 11:22 PM

I dont see PJ getting more than 20 minutes a game. A nice breakdown of post time to me is.......

PF
Sweetney-20
Thomas-12
Brown-18
Wallace-33
Allen-13


I'd like to see Allen more than 13 mpg this season, and really get a look at what he can do, he looked pretty good in the limited time he got down the stretch.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 08:26 AM

Besides, all this is moot until we seen the team on the court.
[/quote]


That is exactly my point. I was stating that Duhon, Sweetney, Deng/Nocioni (whichever) are good bench players. Sefolsha hasn't played yet but from what we both saw I think he will be a great bench contributor (if not eventually take Gordon's spot.). If that were to ever happen then we would for sure have a better bench the those Kings. But I hope that doesn't happen.

Gordon
Nocioni
Sweetney
Duhon

Anyway, you have your opinion and I have mine. We can agree to disagree but we don't need to use words like asinine. Both benchs had great players on them and both fit their team. I think our bench this year is deeper only because we have a good replacement at each position.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 08:41 AM

All in all I think your breakdown is pretty accurate. I think on any night Sefolosha may get 30 minutes and the next night get only 10. Same thing with any players other then Hinrich and Wallace. I can see Nocioni and Deng battling for minutes but if there is anyone who needs to play extended minutes it is Deng. We need to play him as much as possible to develop him as much as possible. I agree that Brown will likely have his minutes dropped somewhat and I think we could also drop Wallace down to about 33 minutes. Other then that the Bulls have questions to answer about who gets what minutes. But either way I think we will still see a very good bench that contributes whether it be on the offensive or defensive end of the floor.

Posted by: sport1016 Jul 26 2006, 09:27 AM

here's how i see the minutes breaking down....

PG
hinrich-35 mins
duhon-10 mins
sef-3 mins

SG
Gordon-30 mins
sef-12 mins
Griffin-6 mins

SF
Deng-28 mins
Noc-16 mins
sef-4 mins

PF
Brown-12 mins
Noc- 14 mins
Sweets- 11 mins
tyrus- 11 mins

C
Wallace- 33 mins
PJ- 10 mins
Sweets- 5 mins

ACTIVE ROSTER
hinrich-35 mins
Wallace-33 mins
Gordon-30 mins
Noc-30 mins
Deng-28 mins
Brown-22 mins
Sef-19 mins
sweets-16 mins
Tyrus-11 mins
Duhon-10 mins
Griffin- 6 mins
Malik-Irregular mins based on other's struggles or foul trouble

ANALYSIS
Looking at these numbers, I am happy with mins for everyone except duhon, malik and griffin. The problem is that most teams consistently play 9 or 10 guys. We are too deep not to play 11 or 12 guys, but all three of those guys deserve more mins, but who do you take them away from? A couple guys are gonna have to get used to getting less minutes than last year, or we will have a problem.

hinrich, gordon, and noc should paly the most mins, along with deng. PJ has been a 30 mpg player, but at 37 i think 22 mins is enough to make him happy and get an impact from him while giving some of his normal 30 to younger guys.

Sef at 19 mpg is great. It's not a ton of mins, but enough to make an impact at every position he plays.
I wish there were a few more mins available for sweets and tyrus, but 16 and 11 I think is enough unless either come on real strong this year.

Griffin can come in for 6 mpg to be a defensive stopper, but he deserves probably 15mpg. I love both, but duhon or griffin really needs to end up at the end of the bench with irregular mins. They both deserve more mins, but until we can play 6 on 5 that won't happen. Playing sef more at pg helps griff gets his mins or getting rid of griffs mins means duhon gets more pg mins and sef will be 3rd sf.

The only thing I would change on my list is maybe take thabo's sf mins and give them to griff, but I stand by what i wrote.

The truth is, just like with guys like sweets and pargo last year, some games a guy like griff or sef or duhon will play 25 mins, some games 7 mins, and it will vary every game depending on matchups and who's hot. But I think these will be people's averages.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 10:58 AM

[quote name='sport1016' date='Jul 26 2006, 09:20 AM' post='16863']
here's how i see the minutes breaking down....


SF
Deng-28 mins

I like your analysis except for the fact that Deng only gets 28 minutes. If that happens the coach and the organization is stupid. You have to develop your're best prospect as much as possible and give him as much confidence as possible.

Niether one of us included Khryapa who is in my opinion a good reserve and who might be better then the offensively challenged Griffin. Below is a comparison if their stats (khryapa on top Dal on bottom)

05-06 POR 21.6 min .462 fg .333 3pt 4.4 reb (the kid is only 24.)
05-06 DAL 23.9 min .480 fg 000 3pt 4.4 reb (and he is 35)

Pretty similar stats except Khryapa can shoot the 3 and he is 6'9" as opposed to Griffin at 6-5"


Everyone keeps talking about the Bulls maybe using a lineup of 3 small guards but I could see them using a lineup occassionally with 4 SF's. The four SF's could be a mixture of Deng 6-9, Nocioni 6-7, Khryapa 6-9, Griffin 6-5, Sefolosha 6-6?, Thomas 6-9 with Sefolosha running the point. There are a lot of possibilities out there and I think that it would be extremely hard for any team to match up with such a lineup. Most of those guys can run and each adds a different dimension on the floor. Nocioini and Khryapa are good shooters and can hit the three (and I think Deng will prove he has improved in that area as well). Sefolosha is an uptempo player and can drive and kick it out. Both Deng and Nocioni can drive and Deng can play without the ball. Thomas can grab the boards.

One thing about this team is that if there should happen to be an injury or two we are set up in a way where it shouldn't affect us too much.

However, with all of these possibilities I think Deng needs his 30+ minutes and preferably around 35 per game. I think Paxson will realize we have to many players and I expect that before the season starts are few players will be dealt for 1 player and possible another pick down the road.

Posted by: sport1016 Jul 26 2006, 11:25 AM

I agree Deng should get 35 mpg, but we have too much depth and he is one of the few players on the team that is best suited to play only one position. We are too deep at sf.

Khryapa would be a good reserve, but I was working on a 12 man active roster, and included malik instead of khrapa bc malik can play center, our thinnest position IF PJ starts at PF, which I believe he will though Noc will get more mins there.

The difference between khryapa and griffin is one is a combo 3/4 (which we seem to have like 15 of) and one is a 2/3. While we are stacked at the 3, but it is finally nice to have 3 SGs instead of none. Griff for his D will make the 12 man active roster over Khryapa bc of that. If Khryapa is active, and I'm completely fine with that as he appears to be a quality role player, it will be at the expense of malik's roster spot, and not griff.

Posted by: Bullies4Life Jul 26 2006, 11:47 AM

Spreading the minutes between the Bulls players is tough. I think injuries is gonna play a big part on how much people will avereage. But one thing is for sure, outside of Wallace and Hinrich, whoever gets injured shouldnt really mest up the Bulls from playing at a high level.

-I think the best part about having such a deep rotation is that we will have a lot of guys coming from the bench with a lot of energy. Every night we should out hustle other teams because guys will be bringging it every single night. If they dont, then Skiles will bench you and you wont see playing time.

-On the other hand, i would love to see our young players get more minutes out there and develop sooner than later, but o well.

From what ive read, i think most of you guys got the minutes pretty accurate. And well, im bored, so im gonna post up mine. So if i copy you in some numbers or something, dont take it as im copying you, but more like we just agree and stuff like that.

Im gonna post up numbers as how i see mostly every game being played out... Not by averages of the whole season....

PG- Hinrich/34 mins. Duhon/14 mins. Sefolosha/0 mins.
SG- Gordon/32 mins. Sefolosha/12 mins. Griffin/4 minutes.
SF- Deng/30 mins. Noc/12mins. Thomas/ 6 mins.
PF- Brown/15 mins. Noc/14 mins. Allen/Sweets/Thomas 19 mins.
C- Wallace/34 mins. Brown/ 10 mins. Sweets/Allen 4 mins.

There you guys have it.... I think this is how the minutes will be played out early into the season... In case of a injury and stuff like that, then the numbers obviously will change. Garbage time also will determine some of our rookies getting more playing time. Foul trouble will also change the numbers.
-Also, i know PJ is old, but the guy can still play and is in very good shape for his age. He can still do a lot out there and thats why i have him playing about 25 mins a game. Any questions or concerns,

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 26 2006, 11:56 AM

Yeah, that might be a bit high, I was just going off what he did last year. I still expect at least 25 minutes a game though. Sweetney will not get more minutes than him.

Posted by: taurus515th Jul 26 2006, 12:09 PM

Yes we do have a lot of depth, this is y i think Paxson is not done dealing yet. I think he is done for now but i think another trade might come n around 3 months or so.

The question i have is y would Paxon get Viktor Khryapa who is capable of starting (which he did do n Portland) knowing that its going to be hard for Nocioni to get minutes and he is our 1st SF backup. I dont know but i think Michael Sweetney, Viktor Khryapa, Malik Allen, and our 4 picks next year (including the option to swipe the Knicks pick) might be involved n a trade for a post-player. To me i think getting a post-player was our biggest need going into the off-season more than getting a true center and Paxson has not solve that problem yet. I know Micheal Sweetney is a post-player but im not sure if Skiles/Paxson really wants to keep him. I could be wrong tho but this is just my opinion.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 26 2006, 12:38 PM

That's unlikely because we can't really trade the 1st round picks. We don't technically own the Knicks' pick, and if we trade ours we can't make the swap. We'd basically be getting late-first value for a lottery pick if we did that.

Posted by: taurus515th Jul 26 2006, 12:40 PM

thanx 4 informing me about that. i did not know that.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 01:55 PM

The fact that we have more then 12 legit players once again leads me to believe that Paxson isn't done working his magic. Maybe he can package a few players to get us a better back-up center, or maybe he will still try and get the Bulls a quality low post scoring power forward. I just don't see how having Khryapa on the unactive roster would be doing anyone any good. The kid is 24 years old and I am sure there are several teams in the league that would like to have him on their bench. I didn't like the fact that we went after Adrian Griffin again. Yes he has experience but did we really need him. Gordon should get a chunck of the minutes at SG and Sefolosha should get the rest. There really was no need for Griffin. We are too stacked at SF for him to get minutes there. Barring a major injury we really don't need his services.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 02:48 PM

Wouldn't surprise me. I thought all along that Sweetney would be one of the first traded. I also think the same thing about Duhon. Why would they go and get Griffin again? He is not a point guard but he really wasn't needed. Maybe they want Sefolosha to play backup point guard. So if Sweetney, Khryapa and Duhon leave that clears up about $6.9 million in cap space for whoever comes back our way.

Here is a list of PF's that make around that next year

Drew Gooden $5.3 million (even though he will likely resign for more then the qualifying offer)
Juwan Howard $6.93
Jeff Foster $5.25
Udonis Haslem $5.52
Darko Milicic $5.2
Chris Wilcox? If he signs the a 1yr extension.
Donyell Marshall 5.2
McDyess $5.8
Stromile Swift 5.4 million
Kenny Thomas 6.7 million
Shareef Abdur Rahim $5.4

The best fit for the Bulls would be Shareef Abdur-Rahim, Chris Wilcox, or Gooden because they are the best scorers on the list. Both would provide the low post presence offensively that the Bulls need. Shareef would also be able to contend as an all-star in the east and he makes significantly less then he is worth. He is also locked into a 5 year contract. Thomas 6.7 million. He just turned 30. The way Kenny Thomas played last year I don't think it would be that big a loss for Sacramento. And Rahim's value is low because of his injury last year.


Younger PF's

Al Jefferson $1.7 million
Kendrick Perkins $1.6 million
Sean May $1.7 million
Ike Diogu $2.1 million

Or they could get a center

Zaza Pachulia $4 million
Primo Brezec $2.7 million
Mutombo 2.2 million
Jeff Foster 5.2 million
Chris Mihm 4.2 million
Mark Blount 6.1 million
Eddy Curry $8 million

(the Bobcats have tons of room under the cap to absorb some contracts)

Why didn't we trade for Charlie Villanueva? T.J. Ford is not the greatest point guard. I am sure we could have offered a little more. The guy is locked down for 3 more years and he is young and inexpensive. Could you imagine him backing up P.J. Brown? (I know I am just rambling but think about what it would have taken for the Bulls to pull that off) (Duhon, Khryapa and 2 second rounders?)(I would even throw in Sweetney)

Does anyone know how much Griffin got? One of my friends said it was 3 yr. $9million.

(I know this post is all over the place but I just wanted to throw names out there and their salaries of potential people the Bulls could still target. I understand that most of the names listed likely have no chance to be a Bull)

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 26 2006, 03:41 PM

I disagree heartily on this one. Sweets pushed PJ in every stat category while playing out of shape and 13 minutes less a game. Sweets in better condition is a no brainer to me, to get the most PT at PF. Ill say this again, all of PJ athleticism is gone, he cant make up for that with savvy and heart alone. Sweets is a younger, more capable scorer than PJ, and putting him out there for 20+ a game is a must. Anyone who sees him getting less than the 18 he played last year is going to be wrong, you can quote me on that.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 26 2006, 03:49 PM

Sweetney didn't play all that much last year despite our lack of talent there. He could actually score and yet he still spent an awful lot of time on the bench. Sweetney is clearly in Skiles' doghouse, and I doubt that's changed. Now that we've upgraded our frontcourt, I don't see how he's suddenly going to play more. Brown is a better rebounder and defender, and he brings a veteran presence. He's a Skiles type of player, which is why he'll get more minutes.

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 26 2006, 03:56 PM

He didnt play much last year because of the terrible shape he was in. Not only did Skiles hate that, but i doubt he was capable of standing out there more than 20 a game. You dont see how he's sudeenly gonna play more? How about the fact that he has dedicated himself to getting in better shape giving Skiles the option of running him out there more. Pj is nothing more than a bench contributor on a good team anymore, he is not nearly the same player anymore, especially on D where he used to be a stud. He pulled down a whole 2 boards more a game in 13 more minutes than Sweets, and blocked less shots in those 13 minutes.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 03:57 PM

I agree. Unless we pick up a better PF, or unless Skiles decides to insert Nocioni as the starting PF, Brown will be the starter and will get a majority of those minutes. Sweetney will have had to have buested his ass off, lost 25 lbs, and start playing D before that changes. And plus this is a contract year for Sweetney and I see the Bulls not trying to up his value by playing him more minutes then last year.(just in case they even remotely are planning on keeping him which I don't think they are.)

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 26 2006, 03:59 PM

Sweetney is still far from in great shape, and he's going to be a defensive liability regardless. You could say the same thing about Sweetney, he is not a key contributor on a good team. He can score, but that's about it. Brown brings more to the table, even at this point in his career.

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 26 2006, 04:10 PM

No he doesnt...

You obviously havent seen him play the last 4-5 seasons, and especially not last season. Lets just equalize their stats in 31 minutes played for the sake of proving a point here.

RPG APG SPG BPG TO PF PPG

PJ 7.3 1.2 .61 .67 1.2 2.9 9


Sweets 9 1.5 .5 1.44 2.4 5.44 13.77



So please tell me agin how Sweets is any more of a defensive liability than an end of the road worn down PJ?


Ill just say this again so you can bookmark it or whatever, whoever thinks Sweets will play less than the 18 a game he did last year will be wrong.

Posted by: eddog2 Jul 26 2006, 05:06 PM

P.J. Brown is decent offensively, he is a fundamentals player, he rebounds, and he plays D. To top that off he is an excellent free throw shooter. He is a quality guy and he still is skilled. He starts while Sweetney admires him from the bench while he eats his donuts.

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 26 2006, 05:16 PM

I agree, Brown's offense is not his biggest asset. He is 3 times the defender Sweetney is and is in far better shape, even if he is like 10 years older, and he is a more fundamentally sound player.

Brown will likely be the starter but I see Sweetney and Brown both getting about 20 minutes.

Posted by: bulls91 Jul 26 2006, 06:00 PM

and how many more minutes did brown have to be scored on more v.e. sweets? it all adds up to brown being the better Defencive presence.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 26 2006, 06:39 PM

There's a lot more to defense than numbers. In fact, they tell you very little, there are numerous aspects that simply aren't measured. Sweetney simply can't stay in front of a lot of guys, Brown can.

I've seen him play enough to know that he's a pretty decent all around player, and is better than anything we had last year in the post. Brown has been a consistently solid but not spectacular big man.

There's a reason that Sweetney doesn't play more minutes, he's simply not effective enough defensively to keep him in there that long. You even admitted earlier that he isn't in good enough shape to handle it. Even his field goal percentage wasn't that good last year, he only shot 45%.

You can't just assume that he's going to be just as productive in heavier minutes as he was in limited minutes. He failed to get significant minutes on a size-deficient team last year, and another size-deficient team gave up on him. That doesn't say much about him.

Posted by: taurus515th Jul 26 2006, 08:21 PM

i agree. i know this is off-topic but a lot of people said we were better off keeping Tyson Chandler instead of getting Wallace since there stats n points were the same and they both play D. Well we all know thats dumb and stupid but Ben Wallace is a 4 time DPY and people just want to just look at the stats. Ben Wallace does more than just wut NBA stats say. He intimidates players like if they are about to go for a lay-up and Ben Wallace is their, they know a block is waiting to happen and will try so hard for him not to be able to block their shot they miss the lay-up. But Tyson if he was n that position the player knows its an easy opportunity to go to the free throw line. Like ZoomSlowik said there is a lot more to defense than numbers.

Posted by: Bullies4Life Jul 26 2006, 11:00 PM

Im backing up Zoom over here. Sweets has a hard time playing D, and he fouls a lot too. Not only that, but the guy looked like a rookie out there sometimes just by setting up moving picks and little things like that. Thats why he had a hard time getting off the bench for most of the season..

-Right now the bulls are really trying to win. Forget about developing players, they got Wallace and that just makes a statement that they are here to win. Skiles will play guys that they know what they are doing more than often, and PJ is a better all-around player than Sweets right now.... It hasnt been proven that sweets is better. And just because the guy all of the sudden lost some weight doesnt mean anything...He still has to go out there and prove that he can play both ends of the floor, be consistent, and get the job done in order to see more playing time out there...

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 26 2006, 11:05 PM

Please get back to me when you can make some sense of this as pertains to what was in my quote. Where in my quote did I have any numbers about being scored on? Not to mention if that was the case with the points column(never seen points againt per on an individual player anyway), I stated those numbes where with all minutes being equal(to go with your first sentence). What here all adds up to Brown being a better defenSive presence? When Sweets was averaging more than twice as many blocks? Or was it when Sweets was pulling down more boards?

No stats arent everything, but they have A LOT to show you about the way someone is playing the game. PJ is now playing at a low producing level all around for his PT. Sweets is producing well in a limited role, and will only get better with conditioning. I can safely say, every bit more Sweets gets conditioned will show up in the form of more production for him. All signs point to him already in better shape, saying he wont put up better numbers while in better shape, while playing more minutes, after being more experienced in the league goes against every sort of logic out there. Sweets isnt a huge defensive liability as some claim, he didnt get backed down in the post, he boxes out very well on both ends of the court, he is very strong despite the claims that he is just weak a slob, and he wasnt too slow(just got tired, again the conditioning factors in). He isnt the high energy defender as one would want, but he isnt a pushover on that end of the court by any means. Everything points to Sweets being a better player, you factor in age and how much PJ has regressed, Sweets in better physical shape, and it isnt hard to see. PJ has never been more than a league average productive role player in the post, and is on his last legs, Sweets on the other hand at 13 years younger has already proved he can be just as productive while playing less minutes. It's simple really, Sweets in better shape=Sweets ability to play more minutes at a max level=Sweets producing more on both ends.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 27 2006, 12:08 AM

We'll see. I doubt it. Skiles' opinion is the one that matters, and so far he's gone away from Sweetney.

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 27 2006, 12:14 AM

Brand new season, whole new life for everyone. Skiles isnt as stubborn to throw someone in the doghouse after they have been working hard to be your type of player. Your right though, only time will tell, but PJ=career mediocre role player, now add old and worn down to that, Sweets has the stuff to be much more than that.

Posted by: ZoomSlowik Jul 27 2006, 12:22 AM

Tell that to Tyson Chandler...

PJ has been more than a "mediocre role player." The guy has career averages of 9.4 points, 8 rebounds, and about a steal and a block a game. That's a passable starter or a good bench player. I don't know where you're getting the worn down part either, he's still a competent player. Sweetney isn't going to do much more than PJ has in his career, he's just too limited in too many areas (height, athleticism, and defense chief among them).

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 27 2006, 12:58 AM

Under ten points and 8 rebounds for a big is mediocre. No it's not even close to terrible, but it's certianly not very good. Sweets takes too much flack for his D, he gets rolled off of occasionally, but he doesnt get backed down, stays under good position near the hoop, and provides good help. Like I said his footspeed isnt what one would want in a lock down defender, but his was good(really good on O though, I wonder why it didnt translate), and with weight loss it will get better. There's not nearly as big a difference between PJ and Sweets as everyone is hyping it up to be. The added blocks and strength make up for anything you will get from PJ now. Seriously, PJ=shadow of his former average self, he's not going to be this great defensive stopper, not even close, I'll take Sweets' scoring and strength while giving up little(if anything) on the other side of the court, please.

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 27 2006, 01:31 AM

So, you're sayin PJ Brown is equal to, or at most marginally better than Sweetney on defense?

Posted by: HoofHearted Jul 27 2006, 01:38 AM

After watching how he played last season, undoubtedly yes. Definitely not enough of a difference maker there to keep Sweets scoring off the floor, was gthe basis of what I said. Theyll each have their time to shine in different spots, and like I said it will be around 20 a game for each, but I think Sweets will go out and prove he is worthy of more than the 18 he got last year. People are giving PJ WAY too much credit, especially the ones who think he's some sort of lock down post presence, please, he wasnt even that when he was still good.

Posted by: SoxFan1 Jul 27 2006, 01:52 AM

Well, I see it the opposite way. You're believing the hype about Sweetney's fantastical weigth loss and underestimating Brown's presence on the floor and in the locker room.

Posted by: Bullies4Life Jul 27 2006, 06:47 AM

PJ prolly wasnt known as a lock down post pressense, but if you really think about it, there isnt many of them... Name 3 of them currently playing in the NBA right now...

-PJ did have the label as being a very good low post defender... Kinda like Antonio Davis. I do remember hearing people say that.

One thing about PJ is that he's solid. He's not really gonna hurt you out there on the court. Sweets on the other hand is mostly known for taking up space, pretty solid rebounder, and taking shots, getting his own rebounds, and shooting again.

And the thing that really hurts him is his lateral movement. He's kinda like an Eddy Curry. He's not that good at defending screen and rolls, and cant really step out into the perimeter. He's just a guy that will guard the big guys that will post up. He needs to stay in the paint. And if you stay in the paint, you have to be able to guard the paint when players drive in.... yes, also known as help out defense. As far as how good Sweetny is at guarding the paint... well, he still needs a lot of work. I do remember him getting better at the end of the season tho. He finally took a couple charges at the end of the season. I remember the Bulls Bench going crazzy after he took a charge

Sweets losing weight only means one thing, that he should be better. he will be in better shape, and quicker. As far as how quick he will be on defense, that remains to be seeing. Overall, the guy still has a very wide body, and i dunno if he's gonna have those "quick feet" that every1 notices for defense.

-

Posted by: DrunkBomber Jul 27 2006, 10:01 AM

The difference between Christi and Wallace is a big one in terms of position. Having a defensive big man changes teams offensive game planes. They wont be able to dump off down low all the time and will have to play more honest. That lets guys like Hinrich and Duhon play their defense without the constant concern of having to help out downlow. It makes everyone better and is gonna make a good defensive team great.

Posted by: Bullies4Life Jul 27 2006, 11:55 AM

Good Point