|
>>Listed shooting numbers each night and how Rose was taking >>more shots than any two players COMBINED and shooting a >>HORRIBLE percentage. Two things that can't happen with a >>point guard if you expect to win. > >First, What I and Basa are talking about were two different >things...He was talking SPECIFICALLY about that 2011 playoff >run...I wasn't, early on, until I saw that's the angle he was >going at...So keep that in mind...
fair enough
>As for your view of things: The issue was NEVER that Rose >didn't have a shaky series...I said he did...The issue was WHY >he struggled.... The Bulls needed for Rose to be their highest >scorer every night to win games.... fundamental disagreement right here. YOU (and others) believe he needed to be that. It was pretty clear to all that other than Deng, everyone else had to be fed the ball. So, a less than efficient shooting point guard would need to get everyone else involved rather than shoulder the entire load. it wasn't as if he tried and then went away from it. except for the first game, it was Rose and "dem". Not surprisingly, we lost each of those games.
>I think that's more of an >indictment on the Bulls organization than it is on a PG who >still has Similac on his breath... he was the MVP dog. that similac smelled sweet all year.
> >> >>That Miami series was VERY winnable if Rose wasn't trying to >>one man it so damn much. I blame him and the coach for not >>changing that shit up. No way in the world Deng, Booz, etc >>shouldn't have been getting more touches. >> >>Murph contended Rose HAD to do it, my point was he WASN'T >>DOING IT WELL AND SHOULD HAVE TRIED SOMETHING ELSE. It's >>where his non-traditional PG style has hurt us and him >>actually. >> >>A_B saw it too, but I stopped even going there, some cats >have >>their mind set on one way and that's all they'll ever see. > > > >I think you and A-B are among the few Bulls fans that feel >this way... > >I like what Barkely said about the Bulls that >year...Paraphrasing dude...He basically said, you can't look >at how close the games r...A lot of games are close in the >playoffs...It's how a team loses...And it's clear the Bulls >will not win with one guy expecting to do it all against teams >with several offensive options... that was my point. we lost BECAUSE he was consuming most of the shots and not doing a good job of it. this isn't to say we'd have definitely beat them had he done the alternative, but we never got to find that out and you at least have to go with a different approach if one isn't working.
>So while you guys point out would have should have scenarios >just because how close the games r, I will look at the fact >that the Bulls' defense covered up for a lot of their >offensive problems... no one disputed that as well. but Rose not engaging the other players more made the limited offense even more so.
|