The Official All-Time Chicago Bulls Roster

[QUOTE=Crystallas]I agree, Brand even in his Bull years would be a compeditive upgrade over Horace Grant.

Also, the word "team" comes to mind, you do need some specialists. Steve Kerr or BJ Armstrong could pop 3's like madmen, and BJ was pretty good on D in the 94 season. Kukoc was always icing on the cake, and should be on this team, heck... Nocioni would be a great fit too.
I wonder if Rose's assist total, even as a rookie would turn into some astronomical number.[/QUOTE]
I wanted badly to include Kerr, Hodges, or BJ (in that order), but found it difficult to leave of anyone.

If I left off anyone, it would be Rose, ASSUMING this is a one-year team. If we're talking about building a dynasty, then I'd leave off NVL, but for one year, leave off Rose, as I don't see him playing much behind Hinrich and NVL.... and in those limited minutes, I'd rather have a fearsome 3point shooter.

[QUOTE=kshutts1]I wanted badly to include Kerr, Hodges, or BJ (in that order), but found it difficult to leave of anyone.

If I left off anyone, it would be Rose, ASSUMING this is a one-year team. If we're talking about building a dynasty, then I'd leave off NVL, but for one year, leave off Rose, as I don't see him playing much behind Hinrich and NVL.... and in those limited minutes, I'd rather have a fearsome 3point shooter.[/QUOTE]

For a typical team too, you play the top 8-9 players anyway as MJ and his fellow alltime greats would play major minutes. Whether it's Kerr, or Hodges, or Paxson, who cares? All these guys are all comparable interms of shooting accuracies, but all these guys have limited other skills too, so it doesnt' really matter.

[QUOTE=Glide2keva]Yes I did, I couldn't leave Pax and BJ, and Kerr off the squad.

As far as bringing Rose off of the bench, yes I would, because him and MJ wouldn't work on the court together.

Kirk can run the floor, so can Scottie, but Kirk is a decent spot up shooter and a tough defender, exactly what the bulls would need.

Rose would come in with the second unit where Kukoc can run the offense and Rose could shine.

I think my all-time Bulls team is pretty good.[/QUOTE]

How do you know Rose wouldn't play great with MJ? These great guys find ways to co-exists IMO. It's not like Rose is a big ball hog as he ave. 6.3 assists right in his first rookie season.

[QUOTE=tamaraw08]How do you know Rose wouldn't play great with MJ? These great guys find ways to co-exists IMO. It's not like Rose is a big ball hog as he ave. 6.3 assists right in his first rookie season.[/QUOTE]

Kirk fits better with MJ because his outside shot is better. That was the one thing that all the guards that played with MJ had in common...Paxson, BJ, Harper, Kerr...

I do like the starting lineup of Gilmore, Grant, Pippen, MJ, and Kirk. I too would find it hard to keep BJ off the team since he was always one of my favorites, but I think the guys the OP selected were real good. I would replace Theus with another big man, probably Rodman just to be able to bring in a banger if needed. We have plenty of guards, and Pippen and Kukoc can play either guard spot if necessary too.

[QUOTE=Bulls_Fan20]Kirk fits better with MJ because his outside shot is better. That was the one thing that all the guards that played with MJ had in common...Paxson, BJ, Harper, Kerr...

I do like the starting lineup of Gilmore, Grant, Pippen, MJ, and Kirk. I too would find it hard to keep BJ off the team since he was always one of my favorites, but I think the guys the OP selected were real good. I would replace Theus with another big man, probably Rodman just to be able to bring in a banger if needed. We have plenty of guards, and Pippen and Kukoc can play either guard spot if necessary too.[/QUOTE]

Again, pls don't get me wrong bec I really love Kirk esp his defense. I debated hard against most Lakers fans on how good Kirk's defense really is, but I disagree about your point that Kirk's outside shot is better than Rose. It is true that Rose shot a paltry 22% from the 3pt line, but his midrange jumper and ability to penetrate is really good compared to Kirk(47.5% overall). Kirk doesn't penetrate that much, which lead me to believe that his low CAREER FG% at 41.5% is a concern(bec the bulk of his shots comes from 12-18 feet). He only hit above 43% in 2 of his entire 6 yrs in the league, that is way too low IMO. 2-way players is a gem interms of all time great Bull's players, I'll take Paxson bec of his ability to shoot and I think he is not that bad defensively as compared to other shooters like Kerr, BJ Armstrong etc.

[QUOTE=tamaraw08]Again, pls don't get me wrong bec I really love Kirk esp his defense. I debated hard against most Lakers fans on how good Kirk's defense really is, but I disagree about your point that Kirk's outside shot is better than Rose. It is true that Rose shot a paltry 22% from the 3pt line, but his midrange jumper and ability to penetrate is really good compared to Kirk(47.5% overall). Kirk doesn't penetrate that much, which lead me to believe that his low CAREER FG% at 41.5% is a concern(bec the bulk of his shots comes from 12-18 feet). He only hit above 43% in 2 of his entire 6 yrs in the league, that is way too low IMO. 2-way players is a gem interms of all time great Bull's players, I'll take Paxson bec of his ability to shoot and I think he is not that bad defensively as compared to other shooters like Kerr, BJ Armstrong etc.[/QUOTE]
Look at history, and you'll see why you're probably the only person that likes Rose's fit with Jordan more than Hinrich's.

Harper - not a strong shooter, but VERY good man-to-man defender, as well as playing passing lanes, good midrange game, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
Kerr - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
BJ - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
Paxson - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often


Hinrich - Good shooter, good man-to-man defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often

Rose - poor shooter, average (at best) man-to-man defender (admittedly with room for improvement but again, I am going by a one year team), good at playing passing lanes, rarely plays off the ball, penetrates often

Would he fit well with Jordan? Perhaps... but Jordan's track record (and Kobe's, for that matter, as well as LeBron, Wade, etc) is that he plays best when he is the primary ball handler and/or creator.

Why fix it if it ain't broke?

[QUOTE=kshutts1]Look at history, and you'll see why you're probably the only person that likes Rose's fit with Jordan more than Hinrich's.

Harper - not a strong shooter, but VERY good man-to-man defender, as well as playing passing lanes, good midrange game, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
Kerr - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
BJ - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often
Paxson - Great shooter, not a good defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often


Hinrich - Good shooter, good man-to-man defender, plays off the ball a lot, doesn't penetrate often

Rose - poor shooter, average (at best) man-to-man defender (admittedly with room for improvement but again, I am going by a one year team), good at playing passing lanes, rarely plays off the ball, penetrates often

Would he fit well with Jordan? Perhaps... but Jordan's track record (and Kobe's, for that matter, as well as LeBron, Wade, etc) is that he plays best when he is the primary ball handler and/or creator.

Why fix it if it ain't broke?[/QUOTE]

What makes a great player great? His ability to adapt on whatever the situation he is in. Kerr and Armstrong, not great defenders, MJ and Scottie were always there to provide help. I see your point about the possible conflict bec. both MJ and Rose loves to handle the ball but the last 4-5 years of MJ's career, he picked his spots in the triangle, at times being the base of the triple post. Let me point out to the last US olympic team composed of superstars that LOVE to handle the ball esp James, Kobe, Wade, Anthony etc. Was there a problem on how to co-exist and work together? I don't think so.

[QUOTE=tamaraw08]What makes a great player great? His ability to adapt on whatever the situation he is in. Kerr and Armstrong, not great defenders, MJ and Scottie were always there to provide help. I see your point about the possible conflict bec. both MJ and Rose loves to handle the ball but the last 4-5 years of MJ's career, he picked his spots in the triangle, at times being the base of the triple post. Let me point out to the last US olympic team composed of superstars that LOVE to handle the ball esp James, Kobe, Wade, Anthony etc. Was there a problem on how to co-exist and work together? I don't think so.[/QUOTE]

As for Jordan in the later years with the triangle, I will have to take your word for it. I watched those years, every televised game, but I don't remember them as well as you apparently do.

However, about the Olympics... TOTALLY different scenario. Those guys weren't out there playing for money, they were playing to win. And please don't waste your time telling me that players play to win in the NBA, too.. if they played to win, then they wouldn't ballhog, they wouldn't leave a great situation for more money, etc, etc. Yes, they WANT to win, and it's huge motivation, but in the end their egos get control of most of them (Jordan WAS one of those) and they need to be THE guy, putting up stats to get more money in the future.
While it is true that when talking about the greatest players ever, them ballhogging and putting up stats is VERY conducive to winning...but there would still be chemistry issues, IMO, and most other people's as well.

[QUOTE=tamaraw08]What makes a great player great? His ability to adapt on whatever the situation he is in. Kerr and Armstrong, not great defenders, MJ and Scottie were always there to provide help. I see your point about the possible conflict bec. both MJ and Rose loves to handle the ball but the last 4-5 years of MJ's career, he picked his spots in the triangle, at times being the base of the triple post. Let me point out to the last US olympic team composed of superstars that LOVE to handle the ball esp James, Kobe, Wade, Anthony etc. Was there a problem on how to co-exist and work together? I don't think so.[/QUOTE]

The reason they needed a shooter around Jordan, especially later in his career, is because he was mainly a post-up player. The big men never had great range, so the opposing big men were already sagging off (I'm not sure how far out Gilmore could hit from, and Grant didn't have a great mid-range jumper). Pippen learned to shoot the 3, but if you have the opposing point guard doubling down on Jordan because your point guard can't consistently hit a shot outside 18 feet, that will hurt him. Granted, Jordan was the greatest of all time, so he would probably find a way to adapt, but you want your best player where he can do the most damage. Jordan was unguardable one-on-one in the post, and having the long-range shooters around him helps him the most.

Paxson shot 36% for his career from 3-point land, BJ shot 42%, and Hinrich is at 38% (Kerr was at 45%, but we already knew he was great). Rose won't keep anyone from helping down on MJ, and though he might be a more dangerous player now than Hinrich, Hinrich is the better fit with this team. And, as has already been mentioned, Hinrich has the edge on the defensive side. Yes, MJ and Scottie are great help defenders, and Grant and Gilmore will defend the lane, but for the sake of argument I will assume we will be playing our "All-Time" team against another one. You can't afford to have other players helping off all the time just because the point guard you have in there does some things better on offense. The lack of defense will not offset the skills on offense. Hinrich gives you better spacing on offense and better on-ball defense. I eventually think Rose will develop those defensive skills, but if we are including him in this discussion, Rose just doesn't pass Hinrich yet.

[QUOTE=Bulls_Fan20]The reason they needed a shooter around Jordan, especially later in his career, is because he was mainly a post-up player. The big men never had great range, so the opposing big men were already sagging off (I'm not sure how far out Gilmore could hit from, and Grant didn't have a great mid-range jumper). Pippen learned to shoot the 3, but if you have the opposing point guard doubling down on Jordan because your point guard can't consistently hit a shot outside 18 feet, that will hurt him. Granted, Jordan was the greatest of all time, so he would probably find a way to adapt, but you want your best player where he can do the most damage. Jordan was unguardable one-on-one in the post, and having the long-range shooters around him helps him the most.

Paxson shot 36% for his career from 3-point land, BJ shot 42%, and Hinrich is at 38% (Kerr was at 45%, but we already knew he was great). Rose won't keep anyone from helping down on MJ, and though he might be a more dangerous player now than Hinrich, Hinrich is the better fit with this team. And, as has already been mentioned, Hinrich has the edge on the defensive side. Yes, MJ and Scottie are great help defenders, and Grant and Gilmore will defend the lane, but for the sake of argument I will assume we will be playing our "All-Time" team against another one. You can't afford to have other players helping off all the time just because the point guard you have in there does some things better on offense. The lack of defense will not offset the skills on offense. Hinrich gives you better spacing on offense and better on-ball defense. I eventually think Rose will develop those defensive skills, but if we are including him in this discussion, Rose just doesn't pass Hinrich yet.[/QUOTE]

All good points esp about punishing the defense esp if the pt guard's defender leaves his man to double-team MJ etc. Still I am not fully convinced about Kirk's ability to shoot from the perimeter. While it is true the his 3pt FG% is higher than Paxson, his [U]overall[/U] FG% at around 42% is still too low IMO, bec of his limitations on penetrating hard to the basket.I really believe he takes a bulk of his shots around between 12-18 footers while being very selective on his 3 pt shots.
Am I being way too subjective? probably. But I see your point about Kirk playing well, creating better chemistry with MJ and the rest of the Bulls superstars bec. of his defense, locker room demeanor and esp his high basketball IQ.
When I read the words all time Chicago Bulls roster and IF chemistry is of vital importance, then yes, I concur, Kirk can play with MJ, but if talent and abilities are the focal basis, I mean if you can start a franchise with one player and MJ, Scottie, Gilmore etc were not there, Would you pick Kirk or Rose?, I pick Rose, but that is just my opinion.

[QUOTE=tamaraw08]All good points esp about punishing the defense esp if the pt guard's defender leaves his man to double-team MJ etc. Still I am not fully convinced about Kirk's ability to shoot from the perimeter. While it is true the his 3pt FG% is higher than Paxson, his [U]overall[/U] FG% at around 42% is still too low IMO, bec of his limitations on penetrating hard to the basket.I really believe he takes a bulk of his shots around between 12-18 footers while being very selective on his 3 pt shots.
Am I being way too subjective? probably. But I see your point about Kirk playing well, creating better chemistry with MJ and the rest of the Bulls superstars bec. of his defense, locker room demeanor and esp his high basketball IQ.
When I read the words all time Chicago Bulls roster and IF chemistry is of vital importance, then yes, I concur, Kirk can play with MJ, but if talent and abilities are the focal basis, [B]I mean if you can start a franchise with one player and MJ, Scottie, Gilmore etc were not there, Would you pick Kirk or Rose?, I pick Rose, but that is just my opinion[/B].[/QUOTE]
And there it is. Not to pick on you, but you don't know how to build a team.

Yes, Rose is the better individual player, but his game wouldn't fit with Jordan nearly as well as Kirk's would.

As for Hinrich's low FG%.... ya, it is going to be lower if he's more perimeter oriented, but we WANT perimeter oriented, so we'll take it.

[QUOTE=kshutts1]And there it is. Not to pick on you, but you don't know how to build a team.

Yes, Rose is the better individual player, but his game wouldn't fit with Jordan nearly as well as Kirk's would.

As for Hinrich's low FG%.... ya, it is going to be lower if he's more perimeter oriented, but we WANT perimeter oriented, so we'll take it.[/QUOTE]

So you will pick Kirk ahead of Rose first, if you are building a team from scratch? Thank God for the current Bulls Management team:lol

Like I said, I can understand a coach putting Kirk beside MJ at the backcourt, it's just for me, I would pick Rose first bec he is more talented, If I am picking an "all time chicago Team".

[QUOTE=tamaraw08][B]So you will pick Kirk ahead of Rose first, if you are building a team from scratch? [/B] Thank God for the current Bulls Management team:lol

Like I said, I can understand a coach putting Kirk beside MJ at the backcourt, it's just for me, I would pick Rose first bec he is more talented, If I am picking an "all time chicago Team".[/QUOTE]
That is not AT ALL what I said.

I said Rose is better than Kirk (aka I'd pick Rose to start a franchise first), but in terms of PLAYER FIT Hinrich goes better with Jordan.

[QUOTE=kshutts1]And there it is. Not to pick on you, but you don't know how to build a team.
.[/QUOTE]
:cry:
But why pick on me, Did you read the whole thread? Incase you missed it, Buechlerforthree and ConannbcRules also picked Rose over Kirk, not just me. Is it bec I persued this debate, but heck, the ironic part is I did say I can see Kirk playing great with MJ bec. of his wit, defense etc

[QUOTE=kshutts1]
Yes, Rose is the better individual player, but his game wouldn't fit with Jordan nearly as well as Kirk's would.

As for Hinrich's low FG%.... ya, it is going to be lower if he's more perimeter oriented, but we WANT perimeter oriented, so we'll take it.[/QUOTE]

incase you picked Rodman over Grant, that makes it 3 low FG% players in the team as in Kirk, Rodman and Gilmore. Its a great defensive team but the other team can put up a variety of zone defenses like the triangle and 2 to clog the middle for MJ and Scottie to operate on.
Im not saying they would lose, but these players' inability to keep the defense honest might pose problems for the team.

For me personally, I really like Grant over Rodman bec of his ability to shoot from about 10-17 feet, and it is my opinion that Kerr is not totally a weak defender at all, so I would take him and his 46%FG from the 3pt line over Kirk too, but that is just me. So to sum it all, you win with defense with Kirk or you win on offense with Kerr.

So...I have been reading this thread for several days but not saying a word. First thought? As someone who truly luvs the Bulls and became a fan of baskeball because of them, I am thrilled to see the list of great players that have worn that beautifully cool red-and-black uniform.

It is obvious that the Bulls have not had the same wealth of big-men superstars as some of the other NBA franchises. For me personally, this fact actually makes me believe that a great big-man is on his way to the windy city. If you look at how often they come along, I would say the Bulls are due to get their next talented big within a year or two.

The true strength of the Bulls has always been on the perimeter and built around very tough defense. The talent that Chicago has had in the backcourt through the years is mind-boggling! Not only do the Bulls have the F'ing G.O.A.T, they just so happen to have his perfect fit right-hand-man too!

One thing that I am surprised that no one has mentioned yet is that the Bulls are currently in possesion of two all-time great PG's! Even if you are not fully a believer in both, you have to admit that having Rose/Capt Kirk at the same time is freaking amazing.

For me personally, I am tired of hearing about trading Kirk. Look...if the Raptors want Kirk, Tyrus, and a draft pick for Bosh I would do it. If there is something else that good I would do that too. However, anything less than Kirk plus filler for a dominant big and I am hanging up the phone on your sorry azz.

Scottie and MJ made each other better by going at each other so hard in practice each day. Kirk and Derrick will do the same for each other and the team we luv. We already saw the improvement in Derrick's defense towards the end of the season, and Kirk became even better at running the offense as soon as he came back from his injury.

Don't whine to me about how having this player for that amount of money is too weird...when you are trying to win an NBA championship sometimes you need to think outside the box. Take advantage of this advantage for Gawd's sake already people.

Derrick and Kirk are going to crush NBA point guards this season! Come on people, nobody else can hit the point guard position that hard. lol. Two awesome PG's that don't have ego issues getting in the way of working together, two guys that just luv their team and want to win? Oh yeah, let's break that up for peanuts.:rolleyes:

The way I see it is something like the Lakers have the SF position covered better than anybody with Artest and Odem. The Magic have the center position covered perfectly with no less than the 2nd best C and the perfect back-up in Gortat. The Bulls have the PG position on lock-down and don't look now but the Bulls will be putting some serious pressure on teams with Deng and J Johnson at the 3 spot.

Give this team Bosh, bring in a guy like Zaza Pachulia to play behind Noah (because Miller is on his last legs/year) and replace half-pint Pargo with a bigger and better defending two-guard like Kelenna Azubuike and the Bulls win it all. Yeah really.

Rose/Kirk = you're dead.

Salmons/Azubuike = nice

Deng/Johnson = Aww, you just went from nice to this is getting nasty.

Bosh/Gibson/Tyrus = perfect fit big-man and great depth

Noah/Pachulia = the center position is now filled with two guys that will play hard and do all the little things that add up big.