As I predicted, the Bulls would win 45-50 games without Rose...

[D-Wade316]

No hating BTW. :D

[Psycho]

I HATE YOU :mad:

btw ur a fegit

[BrickingStar]

LOL AT THE 2011 MVP AWARD :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

[NumberSix]

Yeah, Derrick Rose is a poor man's Westbrook. True story.

[I<3NBA]

LOL AT THE 2011 MVP AWARD :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
many have said it before that Rose got that award undeservingly. the real MVP of the Bulls has always been their defense, orchestrated by Thibs.

[Graviton]

With Rose - 42 games above .500
Without Rose - 8 games above .500

Barely any difference man. They should just trade Rose/Butler to Lakers for Steve Nash and Gasol.

[SamuraiSWISH]

Only an idiot think them winning that amount of regular season games is a reflection of their talent, when in actuality it's evidence of the great coaching and motivation tactics of Thibs.

That's why they always bust their nut in the regular season. They play as hard as they can all season, every night. Not every team does that ... they still aren't close from a talent perspective to Miami, New York, Indiana, OKC, LA Lakers, Clippers, Spurs, Mavericks, etc.

[PieceOfFelt]

The Bulls are a good team and are well coached.

- Felt

[Graviton]

many have said it before that Lebron got that award undeservingly. the real MVP of the Heat has always been their defense, orchestrated by Spoelstra.

I agree.

[tikay0]

many have said it before that Rose got that award undeservingly. the real MVP of the Bulls has always been their defense, orchestrated by Thibs.

Very true.

[nathanjizzle]

LOL AT THE 2011 MVP AWARD :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

here are the bulls records against the top 8 teams in the league for 3 seasons one with a healthy rose, one with a semi healthy rose, and one with no rose.

2010-2011 (healthy rose)
14-7

2011-2012 (semi healthy rose)
9-6

havent updated for a few games*
2012-2013 (no rose)
5-12

[WayOfWade]

Nice prediction, congrats

[DMV2]

Should we laugh at Jordan's MVPs and Finals MVPs because the 1994 Bulls went 55 wins, and was 1 game away from the ECF?

With Rose, loss in 1st Round of 2012 playoffs. Prob gonna happen again this upcoming playoffs.

[PieceOfFelt]

Only an idiot think them winning that amount of regular season games is a reflection of their talent, when in actuality it's evidence of the great coaching and motivation tactics of Thibs.

That's why they always bust their nut in the regular season. They play as hard as they can all season, every night. Not every team does that ... they still aren't close from a talent perspective to Miami, New York, Indiana, OKC, LA Lakers, Clippers, Spurs, Mavericks, etc.


Good point. Regular season wins are largely meaningless.

- Felt

[NumberSix]

Should we laugh at Jordan's MVPs and Finals MVPs because the 1994 Bulls went 55 wins, and was 1 game away from the ECF?

With Rose, loss in 1st Round of 2012 playoffs. Prob gonna happen again this upcoming playoffs.
The difference is that the bulls actually had a lot of roster changes in that short time between the 2 3peats. Michael and Scottie where the only 2 players on the 2nd 3peat roster from the first one.

[PieceOfFelt]

The difference is that the bulls actually had a lot of roster changes in that short time between the 2 3peats. Michael and Scottie where the only 2 players on the 2nd 3peat roster from the first one.

Yes, the 93' and 94' teams were very different.

- Felt

[Unstoppabull]

Only an idiot think them winning that amount of regular season games is a reflection of their talent, when in actuality it's evidence of the great coaching and motivation tactics of Thibs.

That's why they always bust their nut in the regular season. They play as hard as they can all season, every night. Not every team does that ... they still aren't close from a talent perspective to Miami, New York, Indiana, OKC, LA Lakers, Clippers, Spurs, Mavericks, etc.
This. I haven't seen any team play harder than the Bulls in the regular season.

[Graviton]

The difference is that the bulls actually had a lot of roster changes in that short time between the 2 3peats. Michael and Scottie where the only 2 players on the 2nd 3peat roster from the first one.
And what does that have to do with anything? :oldlol:

By your logic, Jordan wasn't really MVP since his team still won 55 games, or even without him his team was so stacked that they still can win that many games. Same can be said about Lebron with Heat having Wade/Bosh/Allen/Battier.

[PieceOfFelt]

This. I haven't seen any team play harder than the Bulls in the regular season.

The Bulls and Spurs play harder than any other teams in the regular season. That's a reflection of their coaches.

- Felt

[NumberSix]

And what does that have to do with anything? :oldlol:

By your logic, Jordan wasn't really MVP since his team still won 55 games, or even without him his team was so stacked that they still can win that many games. Same can be said about Lebron with Heat having Wade/Bosh/Allen/Battier.
I would LOVE for you to explain exactly how that's "my logic". G'head.

[Graviton]

I would LOVE for you to explain exactly how that's "my logic". G'head.
Are you retarded?

Bulls with Rose - 62-20
Bulls without Rose win 40-45 games=they are still a good team, Rose isn't an MVP caliber player.

Jordan with the Bulls - 57-25
Bulls without Jordan - 55-27 - WTF they are still a great team without him! He wasn't an MVP caliber player!

Was that clear enough for your IQ level?

[SamuraiSWISH]

'94 Bulls won all those games for a few reasons:

- Motivated to prove they weren't Jordan-aires
- Had 3 seasons of chemistry and championship experience
- The league underestimated them sans Jordan

Why do people think they were so good or that what they accomplished is special? They struggled v.s. the Knicks and still lost in 6 games. Not 7 ... and they had multiple chances to win and couldn't capitalize.

And if they did, they still have to win out in the ECF. So the difference between Bulls sans Jordan is 2nd round exit, and with him 60+ wins every year, pure domination and THREE PEAT champions.

Oh yea, the very next year the '95 Bulls struggled to stay above .500. Granted they lost Horace, but that wasn't the only reason they struggled. Teams no longer under estimated them.

[NumberSix]

Are you retarded?

Bulls with Rose - 62-20
Bulls without Rose win 40-45 games=they are still a good team, Rose isn't an MVP caliber player.

Jordan with the Bulls - 57-25
Bulls without Jordan - 55-27 - WTF they are still a great team without him! He wasn't an MVP caliber player!

Was that clear enough for your IQ level?
Did you miss the part of my post where I explained that the roster was completely changed?:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:

[DMAVS41]

The Bulls with Rose would be the 2nd best team in the East...and really only the Thunder and Heat could claim to be better on paper. Well, the Lakers could, but obviously that hasn't worked yet.

[DMV2]

The difference is that the bulls actually had a lot of roster changes in that short time between the 2 3peats. Michael and Scottie where the only 2 players on the 2nd 3peat roster from the first one.
First 3-peat was from '91-'93 and second 3-peat was '96-'98.

I'm talking about the '94 Bulls, the season Jordan went to play baseball. Before Jordan's first retirement, he had three Finals MVP and three MVPs under his belt.

And besides Jordan, wasn't a big roster change between the '93 Bulls and '94 Bulls.

Armstrong, Cartwright, English, Grant, King, Paxton, Purdue, Pippen, Williams were all on the '93 and '94 Bulls roster. '94 Bulls added a rookie Kukoc.

Basically, that '94 Bulls were still good enough to make it to the playoffs but without Jordan they weren't a championship team, not even a ECF championship team.

Current Bulls without Rose is a playoff, most posters here already knew that. But without Rose, they're a 1st Round exit team. They were a 1st RD exit team in the 2012 playoffs, and most likely again this upcoming playoffs.

[I.R.Beast]

Only an idiot think them winning that amount of regular season games is a reflection of their talent, when in actuality it's evidence of the great coaching and motivation tactics of Thibs.

That's why they always bust their nut in the regular season. They play as hard as they can all season, every night. Not every team does that ... they still aren't close from a talent perspective to Miami, New York, Indiana, OKC, LA Lakers, Clippers, Spurs, Mavericks, etc.
and the eastern conference is trash

[SamuraiSWISH]

The Bulls with Rose would be the 2nd best team in the East...
Nah, not better than the Knicks. Right there with Indiana probably.

And only because of Rose ... not the other talent on the roster.

This isn't the Mavs we're talking about here in terms of all around talent. Which Dirk managed to miss the entire playoffs with.

:oldlol:

[Silence]

I find it strange that some of you are using this season as proof that Rose should not have won MVP in 2011. Bulls finished with the best record in the entire league two years in a row with Derrick, and are now likely to finish 5th place in the extremely weak east without him (12th overall in the league). If anything this season should strengthen his case for winning it, not diminish it. If you don't think that Rose should have won, that's fine. Just don't use the current record of the Bulls to support your argument.

[francesco totti]

The impact of cleveland without lebron or orlando without howard been bigger then chicago without rose...


but you need to factor in other roster changes as well

[Graviton]

Did you miss the part of my post where I explained that the roster was completely changed?:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:
That's even worse genius, the impact Jordan has was so minimal that a new roster assembled could fill in his role and still win that many games? :oldlol:

Don't you realize that makes your logic that much worse? Some role players they assembled were enough to balance out loss of Michael ****ing Jordan? That guy was an irreplacable MVP? :applause:

[NumberSix]

The Bulls with Rose would be the 2nd best team in the East...and really only the Thunder and Heat could claim to be better on paper. Well, the Lakers could, but obviously that hasn't worked yet.
Nah, Heat, Knicks and Pacers would still be better. Their roster has gotten a lot weaker and Derrick Rose is seriously not that impactful of a player. Is he better than Nate Robinson? Yes. Obviously. But he's still an inefficient shoot first PG.

He's a little bit underrated as a defender, but the Bulls defensively really don't lose much from him being out.

[DMAVS41]

Nah, not better than the Knicks. Right there with Indiana probably.

And only because of Rose ... not the other talent on the roster.

This isn't the Mavs we're talking about here in terms of all around talent. Which Dirk managed to miss the entire playoffs with.

:oldlol:

This is why Rose fans are the worst. Boozer, Deng, and Noah are all very very very good players.

Jimmy Butler is an emerging player that is very good. Hinrich is a solid backup pg. Robinson is a spark plug off the bench. Hamilton, Gibson, Belly...I mean come on. And they all fit perfectly around Rose...none of them need the ball in their hands...so Rose can take his 25 shots a game in the playoffs...LOL

Behind the knicks? Only if Rose isn't as good as Melo. Even with the Pacers? Holy shit.

I've never seen such BS come out of a fan base.

[Graviton]

Did you miss the part of my post where I explained that the roster was completely changed?:hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead: :hammerhead:


First 3-peat was from '91-'93 and second 3-peat was '96-'98.

I'm talking about the '94 Bulls, the season Jordan went to play baseball. Before Jordan's first retirement, he had three Finals MVP and three MVPs under his belt.

And besides Jordan, wasn't a big roster change between the '93 Bulls and '94 Bulls.

Armstrong, Cartwright, English, Grant, King, Paxton, Purdue, Pippen, Williams were all on the '93 and '94 Bulls roster. '94 Bulls added a rookie Kukoc.

Basically, that '94 Bulls were still good enough to make it to the playoffs but without Jordan they weren't a championship team, not even a ECF championship team.

Current Bulls without Rose is a playoff, most posters here already knew that. But without Rose, they're a 1st Round exit team. They were in the 2012 playoffs, and most likely again this upcoming playoffs.

Owned, now stfu and sit down NumberSix wannabe troll. :oldlol:

[DMAVS41]

Nah, Heat, Knicks and Pacers would still be better. Their roster has gotten a lot weaker and Derrick Rose is seriously not that impactful of a player. Is he better than Nate Robinson? Yes. Obviously. But he's still an inefficient shoot first PG.

He's a little bit underrated as a defender, but the Bulls defensively really don't lose much from him being out.

If you take the approach that Rose isn't a true star...that is a different argument.

But the supporting cast in Chicago is great. If you put a guy like Durant or Kobe or Lebron or Wade or Dirk on a team that good...nobody would claiming they have a weak roster. Nobody.

So maybe that is the issue...Rose isn't that good and his fans know it. Not sure...

[NumberSix]

If you take the approach that Rose isn't a true star...that is a different argument.
Well, being a star isn't only about how you play. I mean, Tim Tebow is a star and there isn't a team in the league willing to give him playing time.


But the supporting cast in Chicago is great. If you put a guy like Durant or Kobe or Lebron or Wade or Dirk on a team that good...nobody would claiming they have a weak roster. Nobody.

So maybe that is the issue...Rose isn't that good and his fans know it. Not sure...
Now, the Bulls don't have a weak roster. Weaker than it was. Not weak, weaker.

Yes, If you put a Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, etc.. on that team, they would be contenders. Rose just isn't one of those guys though. I'm not saying he's a fabricated star player or something, but his impact as a player has been clearly overstated. I even think you could put Westbrook on the Bulls and they're probably a 2 seed in the east.

[DMAVS41]

And don't tell us that the Bulls are only good because they play hard. Yes, that is one of the reasons, but you don't beat the Heat like they did on effort.

They have real talent and a deep team that fits around Rose very well. They are missing a true 2nd star..and that is a real weakness, but they've got a lot of versatile players that are very very good.

[DirkNowitzki41]

Rose has such a great supporting cast. Sadly Dirk never had anything this good.

[NumberSix]

Owned, now stfu and sit down NumberSix wannabe troll. :oldlol:
Still waiting to hear how it's my logic that Jordan wasn't the MVP.......

[tazb]

So I see Thibodeau is still underrated as **** and Rose is overrated as **** huh. Tom could coach the ****ing Bobcats to the playoffs. He's the real MVP of the '11 season.

[DMAVS41]

Well, being a star isn't only about how you play. I mean, Tim Tebow is a star and there isn't a team in the league willing to give him playing time.


Now, the Bulls don't have a weak roster. Weaker than it was. Not weak, weaker.

Yes, If you put a Kobe, LeBron, Wade, Durant, etc.. on that team, they would be contenders. Rose just isn't one of those guys though. I'm not saying he's a fabricated star player or something, but his impact as a player has been clearly overstated. I even think you could put Westbrook on the Bulls and they're probably a 2 seed in the east.

So you agree with me.

Yes. Westbrook on that team and they are close to 60 wins. Defensively they would be unreal with him...as he's a much better defender than Rose.

That team is actually probably better for Westbrook considering his better defense.

I don't know who I would start, but a closing lineup of Westbrook, Butler, Deng, Boozer, and Noah would be absolutely deadly on defense.

And with the defensive presence of Westbrook, Deng, and Noah...you could play Hinrich and Hamilton to space the floor for Westbrook.

That is why I want Rose to come back...this team has real potential.

And Butler is going without notice. He's becoming awesome. Put up 22 and 14 tonight.

[NumberSix]

So I see Thibodeau is still underrated as **** and Rose is overrated as **** huh. Tom could coach the ****ing Bobcats to the playoffs. He's the real MVP of the '11 season.
This. Rose is by far the most overrated player in recent memory. The idea of people referring to him as a superstar player is hilarious.

Seriously, think about this. What makes Derrick Rose better than Brandon Jennings?

[Legends66NBA7]

Come playoff time, we'll see how much meaning this really has.

[SCdac]

I find it strange that some of you are using this season as proof that Rose should not have won MVP in 2011. Bulls finished with the best record in the entire league two years in a row with Derrick, and are now likely to finish 5th place in the extremely weak east without him (12th overall in the league). If anything this season should strengthen his case for winning it, not diminish it. If you don't think that Rose should have won, that's fine. Just don't use the current record of the Bulls to support your argument.

This.

We're talking about a Bulls team currently ranked 30th in PPG (92.8) :facepalm

[Kblaze8855]

That people are pointout out a drop from back to back best record in the league to being a notch above average as a negative says a lot. And acting like its an "I called it..." that the Bulls ended up being a middling team is a joke. There were maaaaaaaaaany people saying the same...including me in a topic on how big a difference Nate will make on wins without Rose...



Depends. Its a huge difference far as the level of player. But due to the makeup of the team its not as big when it comes to likely wins and losses.

Kinda like how Magic is 5 levels above say...Mark Jackson. But if you give prime Mark Jackson Kareem, Worthy, Scott, Cooper, and so on its still a good team. Not 65 wins and a ring. But really good.

You could replace Rose with a long list of worse players and not go from a 60 win pace to a 38-40 win pace.

Replace him with Terry Porter the Bulls could still win 55 or more.

Doesnt have anything to do with how good he is. You replace Jordan with Jeff Hornacek in 94 the Bulls may have won 60 games even with the hit on defense. Doesnt say a thing about MJ.


MVP level players have been on teams that did fine without them...forever.

Rick BArry...left his NBA team for the ABA in his prime and later left the warriors....they fell off 2 games the first time and 5 the next.

The Kings were on like a 55 win pace without Webber that had Peja end up 3rd or 4th in MVP voting.

The Magic one year had such a great record without Shaq polls in Orlando had fans picking Brian Hill to stay over shaq if the team had to pick between Shaq and the coach. When Shaq was gone for good they fell off 15 total games...because Penny missed 20+. In the games he played they were over a 50 win pace...no Shaq.

The Knicks lost Willis Reed...the MVP, finals MVP, and all star MVP the season before. Missed the whole season. Fell off 4 games...

No Bird? 15 games off the previous season. Similar to the Bulls.

Heat with Zo when he was a legit MVP level played(came in second in 99 I believe). With Zo...52 wins. No zo? 50.

Lakers without Magic went from 61...to 43. Bulls went from 62 and I think 60 by full season pace...to 43 now with how many games to go?

Bulls with MJ...57...no MJ...55.

76ers won 55 games after Wilt left for Philly.

Largely due to Kareem missing like 15 games his last season.....but the Bucks actually won one MORE game after he joined the Lakers.

The Lakers only fell off 13 games...when they lost Wilt who retired and Jerry West missed 50 games as well.

So no Wilt...and 50 games less of West?

Less impact on the wins and losses thn no Derrick Rose.

If you are dumb enough to think its that simple...you are beyond help.

Being....ok without your MVP level player...but nothing special...does not mean they were not in fact MVP level players.

It means winning 46 games in the NBA doesnt mean anything. Thats why you dont know shit about the 83 Nets.

There is no reason for you to.

Going from 60 something wins to 43 with a week left is a HUGE difference. Going from back to back #1 in the league to like 17-18 games back of the #1 seed...is a huge difference.

What you think of Rose winning MVP has nothing to do with that.

But a hell of a lot of MVP level players have had no greater impact on their teams Ws...nobody says it means they were overrated.

Mostly because...again...46 games dont matter. Contending matters.

And the difference between "Ok" and "They might win it all..." is huge. And being that difference is exactly what greatness is all about.

[nathanjizzle]

This is why Rose fans are the worst. Boozer, Deng, and Noah are all very very very good players.

Jimmy Butler is an emerging player that is very good. Hinrich is a solid backup pg. Robinson is a spark plug off the bench. Hamilton, Gibson, Belly...I mean come on. And they all fit perfectly around Rose...none of them need the ball in their hands...so Rose can take his 25 shots a game in the playoffs...LOL

Behind the knicks? Only if Rose isn't as good as Melo. Even with the Pacers? Holy shit.

I've never seen such BS come out of a fan base.

i dont get it. you keep judging an entire fan base off 1 poster. this is the same poster you said the same things about in another thread:facepalm

[nathanjizzle]

This. Rose is by far the most overrated player in recent memory. The idea of people referring to him as a superstar player is hilarious.

Seriously, think about this. What makes Derrick Rose better than Brandon Jennings?

are you really this stupid? common, you cant be this retarded and talk like you actually know what youre talking about.

[nathanjizzle]

here are the bulls records against the top 8 teams in the league for 3 seasons. one with a healthy rose, one with a semi healthy rose, and one with no rose.

2010-2011 (healthy rose)
14-7

2011-2012 (semi healthy rose)
9-6

havent updated for a few games*
2012-2013 (no rose)
5-12

bump for the embarrassing posters on here that dont know what they are talking about.

[Euroleague]

Rose is so overrated it's unbelievable. That MVP award is such a joke.

[Rubio2Gasol]

Still waiting to hear how it's my logic that Jordan wasn't the MVP.......

Because - according to you - his contribution was minimal based on the fluctuation in regular season wins caused by his departure.

You're countering that with roster changes and what not. They made roster changes - and probably have a worse roster. However, some players have improved (Noah) and they have more depth.

But Let's forget that a moment.

1. Noah and Boozer - who missed 67 games combined in 2011 have been healthy all year.

2. The competition in the Eastern Conference has significantly depreciated due to both injuries and an overall decline in the quality of the teams.

These two factors are largely accountable for the lack of divergence in the team's record with and without Derrick. Though I don't expect you to even factor this in...as..have others have noted....you are retarded.

[Glide2keva]

Because - according to you - his contribution was minimal based on the fluctuation in regular season wins caused by his departure.

You're countering that with roster changes and what not. They made roster changes - and probably have a worse roster. However, some players have improved (Noah) and they have more depth.

But Let's forget that a moment.

1. Noah and Boozer - who missed 67 games combined in 2011 have been healthy all year.

2. The competition in the Eastern Conference has significantly depreciated due to both injuries and an overall decline in the quality of the teams.

These two factors are largely accountable for the lack of divergence in the team's record with and without Derrick. Though I don't expect you to even factor this in...as..have others have noted....you are retarded.You do know that Noah has been in and out of the line up with plantar fasciaiitis, right?

[Rubio2Gasol]

You do know that Noah has been in and out of the line up with plantar fasciaiitis, right?

I know he missed some games - but he's played the majority of the season and he is the one who carried them early on.

[tazb]

Rose is so overrated it's unbelievable. That MVP award is such a joke.

:applause: Rose missed about 30 games last season (out of 66) before he tore his ACL yet, the Bulls still finished with the best record in the league :roll:. All without their "MVP" :facepalm.

[Kblaze8855]

:applause: Rose missed about 30 games last season (out of 66) before he tore his ACL yet, the Bulls still finished with the best record in the league :roll:. All without their "MVP" :facepalm.

The Bulls were 32-7 with Rose last year. A 67 win pace. And that is why they finished with the best record in the league.


Well considering that they won game 1 vs Philly with him then lost 4 of 5 without him....

They were 33-7 with Rose and 19-13 without him.

You can pretend that a near 70 win pace isnt much different from being the current Nets winning percentage wise....ill just say I dont agree.


Derrick Rose means exactly what an MVP usually means to his team. Somewhere from 12-20 wins. Bet your ass the Bulls with Rose wouldnt be 19 games back of the Heat. They might well be looking up at us like the last two years.

The Bulls defense, rebounding, and overall heart with Roses spark added? That finishing power and run starting talent? We can win near a 70 game pace with a few lucky bounces.

Rose is the difference between having 60 something wins....and having 43 with 3 games to go.

That difference is....massive.

[Dengness9]

Read the whole thread....3 things pop out to me....

1) Number6 still strives on a daily basis to be the worst poster on this site. Mission accomplished in this thread.

2) Even though he hasn't played in a year, Derrick Rose still threatens Lebron and DWade fans ( no such thing as a "heat fan")

3. Kblaze made everyone who attacked Rose look absolutely foolish. Rose deservingly won the MVP award, eventually you guys will have to get over it.

[Kblaze8855]

I dont give a damn who anyone thinks should have won the 11 MVP. I want to know in what world going from back to back #1....67-68 win pace with a guy the season before....to the 5th or 6th seed 19 games out of first is not only....not much of a dropoff....but doing so well as to insult the missing player.

Lets say they win 45. Split the last fewe. They are 6-4 the last 10. Seems fair.

45 games as opposed to the 62 win pace they were on last year. 67-68 with Rose. But ignoring that. Just bottom line. They were on a 62 win full season pace last year. Won 62 the year before that.

To 45?

A 17 win dropoff...is not only not major...but so insignificant as to laugh at the missing leader? Do you know how huge that difference is?

Thats...the Pistons being easily in the playoffs instead of a bottom feeder.

Thats...Lakers being a full game up on OKC for the #1 seed.

Thats....the Kings in the 5th seed.

Thats Nets from where they are...to BETTER than the Heat.

Thats the Knicks having a 70 win team.

Thats last years Suns....having the best record in the NBA.

17 wins is a monumental gap in the NBA.

And some of you are drooling over it as if it means Derrick Rose has little impact?

If your favorite team won 17 more games this season....is it not a whole different ballgame?

The Mavs? Plus 17....3 seed. Instead of watching the playoffs from home. No big deal?

One of you "I told you he didnt make a difference" types...let me know.

Your team is 17 games better than it is.

You dont consider that major?

[97 bulls]

Should we laugh at Jordan's MVPs and Finals MVPs because the 1994 Bulls went 55 wins, and was 1 game away from the ECF?

With Rose, loss in 1st Round of 2012 playoffs. Prob gonna happen again this upcoming playoffs.
Why do people try to use this a an indictment against Jordan? The 96 Bulls were.essentially the same team as the 94 squad. They won 72 games. Best ever. Thats a 17 game improvement.

[Kblaze8855]

Why do people try to use this a an indictment against Jordan? The 96 Bulls were.essentially the same team as the 94 squad. They won 72 games. Best ever. Thats a 17 game improvement.

1995 happened you know?

The games were played.

I swear its as if it was erased from memory a lot of the time.

Not that it has anything to do with your issue either way. Im just saying...1995 did happen.

I wanna say we won 47 games. No Horace hurt.

[ChuckOakley]

I dont give a damn who anyone thinks should have won the 11 MVP. I want to know in what world going from back to back #1....67-68 win pace with a guy the season before....to the 5th or 6th seed 19 games out of first is not only....not much of a dropoff....but doing so well as to insult the missing player.

Lets say they win 45. Split the last fewe. They are 6-4 the last 10. Seems fair.

45 games as opposed to the 62 win pace they were on last year. 67-68 with Rose. But ignoring that. Just bottom line. They were on a 62 win full season pace last year. Won 62 the year before that.

To 45?

A 17 win dropoff...is not only not major...but so insignificant as to laugh at the missing leader? Do you know how huge that difference is?

Thats...the Pistons being easily in the playoffs instead of a bottom feeder.

Thats...Lakers being a full game up on OKC for the #1 seed.

Thats....the Kings in the 5th seed.

Thats Nets from where they are...to BETTER than the Heat.

Thats the Knicks having a 70 win team.

Thats last years Suns....having the best record in the NBA.

17 wins is a monumental gap in the NBA.

And some of you are drooling over it as if it means Derrick Rose has little impact?

If your favorite team won 17 more games this season....is it not a whole different ballgame?

The Mavs? Plus 17....3 seed. Instead of watching the playoffs from home. No big deal?

One of you "I told you he didnt make a difference" types...let me know.

Your team is 17 games better than it is.

You dont consider that major?
Not only that, it is much tougher to go from a good-ish team (45 wins) to an elite team (60+ wins) as opposed to bad team with 24 wins to an average team with 41 wins.

[DMAVS41]

Anyone claiming Rose didn't deserve MVP or that he wouldn't have this Bulls team at 60 plus wins is a moron.

I don't think many logical people refute that.

I think the reason why the Bulls record without Rose is often brought up is because Rose fans act like those guys couldn't win a game without him.

How many times have we heard that Rose is the only reason they are any good etc.

Rose makes them great, but even without him, they are a very good team.

Honestly I think that is the issue. Rose fans have under-rated his help for the past couple years. Hell, I had a Rose fan tell me that Thibs isn't a good enough coach. Comments like that is where this stuff comes from.

[Kblaze8855]

I think the reason why the Bulls record without Rose is often brought up is because Rose fans act like those guys couldn't win a game without him.



You are not dumb enough to not understand hyperbole. Which clearly such a statement has to be. Why? They already won games without him last year and the year before that. So what would a claim that they literally couldnt do it be? Clearly not to be taken serious.

The team went from great to....like...whatever.

About as expected.


How many times have we heard that Rose is the only reason they are any good etc.


That is an issue of what you consider "good". I dont consider 43-46 wins in the east good. 50 maybe. And even then...how many 50 win teams matter? Have to set the standards on that one.


Rose makes them great, but even without him, they are a very good team.

Honestly I think that is the issue. Rose fans have under-rated his help for the past couple years. Hell, I had a Rose fan tell me that Thibs isn't a good enough coach. Comments like that is where this stuff comes from.


Some fan of everyone has said something wrong. What of it? Ive had Dirk fans tell me Larry Bird would be on the bench behind Dirk after 2000....and had you tell me a team with 5 all stars wasnt a lot of help because it didnt mesh well.

People get emotional and say foolish things.

[DMAVS41]

You are not dumb enough to not understand hyperbole. Which clearly such a statement has to be. Why? They already won games without him last year and the year before that. So what would a claim that they literally couldnt do it be? Clearly not to be taken serious.

The team went from great to....like...whatever.

About as expected.



That is an issue of what you consider "good". I dont consider 43-46 wins in the east good. 50 maybe. And even then...how many 50 win teams matter? Have to set the standards on that one.




Some fan of everyone has said something wrong. What of it? Ive had Dirk fans tell me Larry Bird would be on the bench behind Dirk after 2000....and had you tell me a team with 5 all stars wasnt a lot of help because it didnt mesh well.

People get emotional and say foolish things.

Hence the backlash. You are not dumb enough to not understand how this forum works.

Crazy fans of player x make absurd claims...and then they are thrown back at them in threads.

Do we really need to explain how this place works? And it's a bit more...with Rose, his fans generally try to blame his poor play on his teammates. Which ups the ante on stuff like this.

Very few Rose fans, even the logical ones, were willing to admit he just played like complete ass in the ECF in 11....like you said, people that get emotional say foolish things.

[Kblaze8855]

I kinda wonder what you think absurd claims related to rose are. You mentioned something along the lines of rose fans being the worst...whatever it was. Im not scrolling and checing.

While just this week ive read Kobe fans claim Lebron couldnt play in the 90s, Kobe should be MVP on a 8th seed with 60 win talent, that Jordan is overrated because the 80s played no defense, Shaq should thank Kobe for making him a winner and on and on.

So tell me. What "Oh my god...." statements have you heard about rose to blow that out of the water?

The "Its a bit more" part I mean. Rose has never even been that big an issue. Even the year he won MVP he wasnt as discussed as Lebron.

You seem to have some issue with him I dont remember the origin of. He doesnt strike me as the type to generate much hate. Gang of Heat fans mad at him over...whatever they think him winning MVP means in regards to Wade and Lebron.

But really...ive never personally met anyone who hated on Derrick Rose the way ive seen you. Ive met Kobe haters. Lebron ones too. Not many...but they are out there.

Rose? Seems generally liked. kinda like RG3 or Russell Wilson. What is there to be mad about?

[DMAVS41]

I kinda wonder what you think absurd claims related to rose are. You mentioned something along the lines of rose fans being the worst...whatever it was. Im not scrolling and checing.

While just this week ive read Kobe fans claim Lebron couldnt play in the 90s, Kobe should be MVP on a 8th seed with 60 win talent, that Jordan is overrated because the 80s played no defense, Shaq should thank Kobe for making him a winner and on and on.

So tell me. What "Oh my god...." statements have you heard about rose to blow that out of the water?

The "Its a bit more" part I mean. Rose has never even been that big an issue. Even the year he won MVP he wasnt as discussed as Lebron.

You seem to have some issue with him I dont remember the origin of. He doesnt strike me as the type to generate much hate. Gang of Heat fans mad at him over...whatever they think him winning MVP means in regards to Wade and Lebron.

But really...ive never personally met anyone who hated on Derrick Rose the way ive seen you. Ive met Kobe haters. Lebron ones too. Not many...but they are out there.

Rose? Seems generally liked. kinda like RG3 or Russell Wilson. What is there to be mad about?

I actually like Rose. Can't stand his fans.

Like I said, his fans...at least the ones I've experienced here. Refuse to just admit when he plays poorly. And there is other stuff...acting like Rose is on another level than Paul or Westbrook etc...

But Rose himself...actually like him a lot.

[Remix]

Damn you Rose haters are terrible. I think pretty much everyone agreed they would still finish 5-7 in the East without him. With him they are first or second.

How many times did the Bulls score under 80 points this year? A fcuking lot. Having to rely on Deng and Boozer as 1a 1b options when neither are really first options. When Nate didn't just extremely explode off the bench the Bulls would be done. Having a great playmaker like Rose would have definitely made them a 60 win team.

[Kblaze8855]

I...suspect you are getting mad at shit in your head. People often do that to justify hating.

Another level than Chris Paul?

Westbrook maybe. Even that would require some pretty liberal level definitions....

EVen if someone had Rose as the best player in the league(Something ive seen said by people clearly excited over a big play or joking)....they would have a Paul type 3-4 or so?

This feels like one of those things hard to back up with proof where someone ends up saying "Well im not gonna find ___-" because they cant.

Rose vs Paul topic from a year ago(Rose went down a few weeks later)


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=256275


Where is the disrespect? Are those a bunch of Bulls fans picking Rose?

I see Hornet fans, Celtics, Spurs, and so on going both ways.

I suspect you saw...something...at some point...and a few incidents by people not to be taken serious stand out in your mind.

Rose has never been one of the majorly super praised people even when he won MVP. He got the best PG ranking an MVP is gonna get. But he was never on some shit where I or others needs to delete 4 topics an hour because some idiots are acting like hes better than Magic Johnson.

Maybe I have a more total view because deleted topics arent deleted to me. I see them forever. Rose doesnt even crack the list of guys with the most "WTF...." topics/posts and he never has.

[nathanjizzle]

dmavs crying about "rose fans" opinions on this board (1 person that has 90 posts).

[97 bulls]

1995 happened you know?

The games were played.

I swear its as if it was erased from memory a lot of the time.

Not that it has anything to do with your issue either way. Im just saying...1995 did happen.

I wanna say we won 47 games. No Horace hurt.
My point is the difference between the 93 and 94 Bulls isnt simply one didnt have Jordan. The two teams had the same players in NAME ONLY. Cartwright, Paxson, Scott Williams, rarely played. Jordan, Stacy King, and Trent Tucker were gone. Obviously 95 happened. But unlike 94, that team had no interior defense to speak of.

[tikay0]

Kblaze just ethered DMAVS41/NUMBERSIXX. :applause: :oldlol: :cheers:

[Jailblazers7]

I like how the Bulls are suddenly considered good/very good because they won a couple games on primetime. Without Rose, the team is the definition of average.

[juju151111]

Kblaze just ethered DMAVS41/NUMBERSIXX. :applause: :oldlol: :cheers:
:lol ...........

[97 bulls]

And lets not forget the Bulls did get Nate Robinson and Kirk Hinrich to help ease the loss of Rose. Without those two, the Bulls would be alot worse.

[tazb]

I dont give a damn who anyone thinks should have won the 11 MVP. I want to know in what world going from back to back #1....67-68 win pace with a guy the season before....to the 5th or 6th seed 19 games out of first is not only....not much of a dropoff....but doing so well as to insult the missing player.

Lets say they win 45. Split the last fewe. They are 6-4 the last 10. Seems fair.

45 games as opposed to the 62 win pace they were on last year. 67-68 with Rose. But ignoring that. Just bottom line. They were on a 62 win full season pace last year. Won 62 the year before that.

To 45?

A 17 win dropoff...is not only not major...but so insignificant as to laugh at the missing leader? Do you know how huge that difference is?

Thats...the Pistons being easily in the playoffs instead of a bottom feeder.

Thats...Lakers being a full game up on OKC for the #1 seed.

Thats....the Kings in the 5th seed.

Thats Nets from where they are...to BETTER than the Heat.

Thats the Knicks having a 70 win team.

Thats last years Suns....having the best record in the NBA.

17 wins is a monumental gap in the NBA.

And some of you are drooling over it as if it means Derrick Rose has little impact?

If your favorite team won 17 more games this season....is it not a whole different ballgame?

The Mavs? Plus 17....3 seed. Instead of watching the playoffs from home. No big deal?

One of you "I told you he didnt make a difference" types...let me know.

Your team is 17 games better than it is.

You dont consider that major?

I skimmed through this post, didn't read it fully but, replace any other superstar with Rose they would've done the same thing if not better. Shit, even Jennings would've done the same thing. Replace him with LeBron (imagine LeBron w/ Tom :eek:) they would go 80-2.

[nathanjizzle]

I skimmed through this post, didn't read it fully but, replace any other superstar with Rose they would've done the same thing if not better. Shit, even Jennings would've done the same thing. Replace him with LeBron (imagine LeBron w/ Tom :eek:) they would go 80-2.

stupid

[DMAVS41]

I...suspect you are getting mad at shit in your head. People often do that to justify hating.

Another level than Chris Paul?

Westbrook maybe. Even that would require some pretty liberal level definitions....

EVen if someone had Rose as the best player in the league(Something ive seen said by people clearly excited over a big play or joking)....they would have a Paul type 3-4 or so?

This feels like one of those things hard to back up with proof where someone ends up saying "Well im not gonna find ___-" because they cant.

Rose vs Paul topic from a year ago(Rose went down a few weeks later)


http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=256275


Where is the disrespect? Are those a bunch of Bulls fans picking Rose?

I see Hornet fans, Celtics, Spurs, and so on going both ways.

I suspect you saw...something...at some point...and a few incidents by people not to be taken serious stand out in your mind.

Rose has never been one of the majorly super praised people even when he won MVP. He got the best PG ranking an MVP is gonna get. But he was never on some shit where I or others needs to delete 4 topics an hour because some idiots are acting like hes better than Magic Johnson.

Maybe I have a more total view because deleted topics arent deleted to me. I see them forever. Rose doesnt even crack the list of guys with the most "WTF...." topics/posts and he never has.

No, I have a beef with some Rose fans here.

Seen plenty of legit Rose fans do exactly what I say.

I suspect you are clouded just as much as me as you are clearly a Bulls / Rose fan.

Also, it's not making something up in your mind if it is reality. Both the fans on here and the media have pretended all year that this Bulls team is much worse than it is to justify Rose sitting out all year even though he's been cleared.

And all I do is call BS on that.

I argued for Rose for MVP all year in 11. I said earlier that he'd easily have this team at 60 wins. Comparing him to Jennings is a joke. Said it all before. I respond to what I see and try to take everyone that at their word and respond.

I suspect you just ignore a lot of stuff...

[tikay0]

No, I have a beef with some Rose fans here.

Seen plenty of legit Rose fans do exactly what I say.

I suspect you are clouded just as much as me as you are clearly a Bulls / Rose fan.

Also, it's not making something up in your mind if it is reality. Both the fans on here and the media have pretended all year that this Bulls team is much worse than it is to justify Rose sitting out all year even though he's been cleared.

And all I do is call BS on that.

I argued for Rose for MVP all year in 11. I said earlier that he'd easily have this team at 60 wins. Comparing him to Jennings is a joke. Said it all before. I respond to what I see and try to take everyone that at their word and respond.

I suspect you just ignore a lot of stuff...

I honestly don't think you watch enough Bulls games to realize how much pressure Rose takes off of EVERY SINGLE player on this team, offensively.

Our offense this year, is so atrociously bad, besides what you saw in the Miami and NY games. If you watched the Bulls on a game by game basis, you would know how much we miss Rose in SO many ways.

Just like I couldn't argue with you, how much the Mavs need Nowitzki.

[GreatGreg]

No hating BTW. :D
Hey numbnuts, 45-50 is a huge difference from 60+

[GreatGreg]

Bah, kblaze beat me to it. But some of you retards need to think before you post

[Pointguard]

So you agree with me.

Yes. Westbrook on that team and they are close to 60 wins. Defensively they would be unreal with him...as he's a much better defender than Rose.

That team is actually probably better for Westbrook considering his better defense.

I don't know who I would start, but a closing lineup of Westbrook, Butler, Deng, Boozer, and Noah would be absolutely deadly on defense.

And with the defensive presence of Westbrook, Deng, and Noah...you could play Hinrich and Hamilton to space the floor for Westbrook.

That is why I want Rose to come back...this team has real potential.

And Butler is going without notice. He's becoming awesome. Put up 22 and 14 tonight.

Remember Chicago hardly ran offensive sets the first year. You think Westbrook has the mentality to run a team that hardly practiced offense??? Its a first year team. Remember Wade and Lebron in their first year together. Remember their was a real problem of getting the offense in sync. They along with Chris Paul are a head above all other players in exercising whether to pass or shoot. Chris Paul in his first year with his new team also has the same problem. Kobe Bryant also! had the same problem. Four of the best players at this skill of judgement, experience along with leadership, had major problems with keeping their more talented teams on the same page Its apparently not an easy thing to do.

Rose's leadership is on a different level than Westbrook's. When I was talking about this before he won MVP and talking about how Howard lacked this skill, I could see you and a couple of others not getting it then but now several things have come to light.. Rose would be the leader on OKC (Durant said he's just finding out what it entails and Harden pretty much played the role) and OKC would have the best record - no questions asked. OKC often plays disjointed, unfocused and moreso now that Harden is gone. To suggest that Westbrook could come from a team where players have great outstanding talent and great pieces can come over to a team with no outstanding talent, and only very good pieces doesn't make sense. Particularly when you factor in that there is a better player than Westbrook on his own team.

Then throw in adapting to injuries like crazy. You talk about Westbrook's defense but nobody had big games against Rose that year. It was an as thorough of shut out as you would ever see. I don't recall any other player where one player outplayed all of the stars opposite them. Westbrook is having a good year but I recall at least three times when a player opposite him had a big game this year. And Rose guarded Westbrook in their matchups while Westbrook didn't even guard Rose.

Two years ago a turnover prone, absent leader, that lacked discipline wasn't going to do much for a new team, going thru injuries and a new system. You over simplifying things by saying Westbrook on Chicago would be great or equal. Rose was one of the best players in working controlled aggression in the league. Harden was the glue guy on OKC. Westbrook still hasn't stepped up into that position.

So no, they were not on the same level at all in 2011. And Rose made significant improvements every year in the league.

[DMAVS41]

I honestly don't think you watch enough Bulls games to realize how much pressure Rose takes off of EVERY SINGLE player on this team, offensively.

Our offense this year, is so atrociously bad, besides what you saw in the Miami and NY games. If you watched the Bulls on a game by game basis, you would know how much we miss Rose in SO many ways.

Just like I couldn't argue with you, how much the Mavs need Nowitzki.


Where do you get that from anything I've said? I said they'd be a 60 plus win team with him.

I've argued they would have a shot against the Heat.

How is that downplaying his impact? He's the difference between a first round exit and at worst a trip to the ECF in my opinion.

Again. I like Rose...don't like his fans. I think Rose needs to be more efficient and dial back settling for 3's, but he's young and will learn.

[Y2Gezee]

Just another reason why Rose should be playing with his guys.

This is an excellent team.

[DMAVS41]

Remember Chicago hardly ran offensive sets the first year. You think Westbrook has the mentality to run a team that hardly practiced offense??? Its a first year team. Remember Wade and Lebron in their first year together. Remember their was a real problem of getting the offense in sync. They along with Chris Paul are a head above all other players in exercising whether to pass or shoot. Chris Paul in his first year with his new team also has the same problem. Kobe Bryant also! had the same problem. Four of the best players at this skill of judgement, experience along with leadership, had major problems with keeping their more talented teams on the same page Its apparently not an easy thing to do.

Rose's leadership is on a different level than Westbrook's. When I was talking about this before he won MVP and talking about how Howard lacked this skill, I could see you and a couple of others not getting it then but now several things have come to light.. Rose would be the leader on OKC (Durant said he's just finding out what it entails and Harden pretty much played the role) and OKC would have the best record - no questions asked. OKC often plays disjointed, unfocused and moreso now that Harden is gone. To suggest that Westbrook could come from a team where players have great outstanding talent and great pieces can come over to a team with no outstanding talent, and only very good pieces doesn't make sense. Particularly when you factor in that there is a better player than Westbrook on his own team.

Then throw in adapting to injuries like crazy. You talk about Westbrook's defense but nobody had big games against Rose that year. It was an as thorough of shut out as you would ever see. I don't recall any other player where one player outplayed all of the stars opposite them. Westbrook is having a good year but I recall at least three times when a player opposite him had a big game this year. And Rose guarded Westbrook in their matchups while Westbrook didn't even guard Rose.

Two years ago a turnover prone, absent leader, that lacked discipline wasn't going to do much for a new team, going thru injuries and a new system. You over simplifying things by saying Westbrook on Chicago would be great or equal. Rose was one of the best players in working controlled aggression in the league. Harden was the glue guy on OKC. Westbrook still hasn't stepped up into that position.

So no, they were not on the same level at all in 2011. And Rose made significant improvements every year in the league.

Well, I disagree with just about everything. I think Westbrook is just as good as Rose. Was just as good as him in 11...and Westbrook is absolutely a better defender.

That team with Westbrook defending is just a nightmare.

They are just such similar players...especially in 11. Both inefficient as hell in the playoffs. Both prone to settling for bad long shots. I'd say Rose was a better playmaker, but Westbrook was a superior defender. And I liked that Westbrook didn't take as many 3's...although he might have taken a few more in Chicago.

I'm not arguing that Westbrook is/was better. I'm saying that there is virtually no difference between the two players. Which there...just isn't.

[Pointguard]

Well, I disagree with just about everything. I think Westbrook is just as good as Rose. Was just as good as him in 11...and Westbrook is absolutely a better defender.

That team with Westbrook defending is just a nightmare.

They are just such similar players...especially in 11. Both inefficient as hell in the playoffs. Both prone to settling for bad long shots. I'd say Rose was a better playmaker, but Westbrook was a superior defender. And I liked that Westbrook didn't take as many 3's...although he might have taken a few more in Chicago.

I'm not arguing that Westbrook is/was better. I'm saying that there is virtually no difference between the two players. Which there...just isn't.
Rose's role was to cause chaos even if inefficiency was the byproduct. When you haven't played many offensive sets all year the goal of the team isn't efficiency. New sets, new system, and an offensive burden that made any other superstar's load look cheap were causes for his playoff inefficiency. Lebron, Wade, Kobe, and Chris Paul all went thru the similar droughts despite having far less of an offensive burden. Rose was a very efficient player in the playoffs before despite having played against the best defensive teams in the two prior years.

So you disagree with everything I wrote but won't list anything, huh?
Wow, so you think Westbrook wasn't turnover prone?

You thought he was a great leader in 2011?

You think Westbrook is the glue guy on OKC at any point in reality???

You think Chicago had better pieces than OKC?
You think Chicago had one of the games best shot blockers (Ibaka)?
The games best scorer and one of the best shooters? The games best man on man center defender (Perk)? One of the games best sixth men (Harden). A team without any injuries? You can claim some ignorance's but I know you know that OKC has the best record with Rose that year. And there is no reason why a perfectly healthy all year round OKC has to fight a wounded old SA team that had a good missed 30 games to key players due to injuries.

In guarding superstars Rose was definitely a better defender than Westbrook in 2011. Westbrook wasn't 't even always guarding superstar PG's. When he did it wasn't close to the job that Rose did on Paul, Rondo, Williams, Billups and Nash. And since when do you value defense so much anyway.

If Rose was on OKC they would have the best record every year. Please tell me what you disagree with?

[Go Getter]

The Heat could win 45-50 games in the East without Bron. So?

[Kblaze8855]

I think there is a rather large difference. How much you shoot isnt as important as why you take the shots. They are both aggressive, athletic, scoring points, but I dont think that makes them the same any more than all shooters or post scorers are. Mostly...because of the why.

Even if he takes 30 shots it doesnt seem his teammates are frustrated with Rose. Ive read through his career...veterans(Kurt Thomas for one) saying it was hard to get him to understand why he needed to shoot. Russell I can tell annoys his teammates now and then.

I think they like him. He doesnt deserve half the hate he sees. But I dont think Rose given a Durant is gonna be seen as nearly as disruptive or a hidrance to his game the way Russell often is.

I think Russell scores from a "Something to prove" mentality which I dont think Rose shares.

Which makes a difference. Id say Russell could potentially help the Bulls get to the same level Rose does. But I bet the Thunder with Rose would be better than with Russell. I dont think anyone would need to make one of these:

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/spursnation/files/2012/06/Durant-Westbrook-GIF.gif

[DMAVS41]

Rose's role was to cause chaos even if inefficiency was the byproduct. When you haven't played many offensive sets all year the goal of the team isn't efficiency. New sets, new system, and an offensive burden that made any other superstar's load look cheap were causes for his playoff inefficiency. Lebron, Wade, Kobe, and Chris Paul all went thru the similar droughts despite having far less of an offensive burden. Rose was a very efficient player in the playoffs before despite having played against the best defensive teams in the two prior years.

So you disagree with everything I wrote but won't list anything, huh?
Wow, so you think Westbrook wasn't turnover prone?

You thought he was a great leader in 2011?

You think Westbrook is the glue guy on OKC at any point in reality???

You think Chicago had better pieces than OKC?
You think Chicago had one of the games best shot blockers (Ibaka)?
The games best scorer and one of the best shooters? The games best man on man center defender (Perk)? One of the games best sixth men (Harden). A team without any injuries? You can claim some ignorance's but I know you know that OKC has the best record with Rose that year. And there is no reason why a perfectly healthy all year round OKC has to fight a wounded old SA team that had a good missed 30 games to key players due to injuries.

In guarding superstars Rose was definitely a better defender than Westbrook in 2011. Westbrook wasn't 't even always guarding superstar PG's. When he did it wasn't close to the job that Rose did on Paul, Rondo, Williams, Billups and Nash. And since when do you value defense so much anyway.

If Rose was on OKC they would have the best record every year. Please tell me what you disagree with?


I don't "know" anything about what Rose would wouldn't do on the Thunder. I would imagine the results would be roughly the same with him instead of Westbrook. I certainly don't think they beat the Heat last year or anything like that.

I've already told you I think they are virtually the same player. I think Westbrook is a better defender...while Rose is a better game manager. But the two, in terms of impact and style is about as close as it gets for me.

It's not a knock on Rose. He's just done nothing, imo, to separate himself the way you claim he has.

Until I see something out of him that makes me think he's better than Westbrook...I'll continue to lump them together...and rightfully so

Over the last 3 years

23/7/4 53% TS for Rose

23/7/3 54% TS for Westbrook


Playoffs?

25/7/5 50% TS for Rose

23/6/6 51% TS for Westbrook


They just have such a similar impact and game. I'd bet you'd see Westbrook's numbers go up across the board on a single star team as well, but it wouldn't make him any better.

Both guys are awesome. Both guys have struggled with efficiency, especially in the playoffs. Rose takes way too many 3's and Westbrook takes way too many long jumpers.

I can't really speak to leadership or anything like that because I don't see the impact of it. In fact, in the ECF in 11...I saw anything but leadership from Rose. I saw a shaky player that looked unsure of himself in crunch time.

There is just virtually nothing that separates them...and at some point, very soon, Westbrook's ability to never miss a game is going to matter a lot.

[nathanjizzle]

I don't "know" anything about what Rose would wouldn't do on the Thunder. I would imagine the results would be roughly the same with him instead of Westbrook. I certainly don't think they beat the Heat last year or anything like that.

I've already told you I think they are virtually the same player. I think Westbrook is a better defender...while Rose is a better game manager. But the two, in terms of impact and style is about as close as it gets for me.

It's not a knock on Rose. He's just done nothing, imo, to separate himself the way you claim he has.

Until I see something out of him that makes me think he's better than Westbrook...I'll continue to lump them together...and rightfully so

Over the last 3 years

23/7/4 53% TS for Rose

23/7/3 54% TS for Westbrook


Playoffs?

25/7/5 50% TS for Rose

23/6/6 51% TS for Westbrook


They just have such a similar impact and game. I'd bet you'd see Westbrook's numbers go up across the board on a single star team as well, but it wouldn't make him any better.

Both guys are awesome. Both guys have struggled with efficiency, especially in the playoffs. Rose takes way too many 3's and Westbrook takes way too many long jumpers.

I can't really speak to leadership or anything like that because I don't see the impact of it. In fact, in the ECF in 11...I saw anything but leadership from Rose. I saw a shaky player that looked unsure of himself in crunch time.

There is just virtually nothing that separates them...and at some point, very soon, Westbrook's ability to never miss a game is going to matter a lot.

in 2011 i did the same stat check i did with lebron against the top 6 teams in the nba

rose were 28 pts 7 assist and bulls <.600 winning percentage
westbrook from what i can remember was under 20 pts and had 5. somthing assists. i dont remember there record. pretty big difference and it was clear who was better 2 years ago and anyone that think they are the same player is ignorant. now 2 years later you cant judge whos better since rose has been out a year.

[The_Yearning]

D.Rose bitchass being out for a year got these clowns talking nonsense.

Westbrook just isn't on Rose's level.