[QUOTE=Shooter;14313250]He's an upgrade for sure.[/QUOTE]
A guy who has put up 22/5/4 on 42% in the playoffs is an upgrade over a guy who puts up 33 6/6 on 49%?
Bron stans intelligence on full display:facepalm
Printable View
[QUOTE=Shooter;14313250]He's an upgrade for sure.[/QUOTE]
A guy who has put up 22/5/4 on 42% in the playoffs is an upgrade over a guy who puts up 33 6/6 on 49%?
Bron stans intelligence on full display:facepalm
[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14313460]A guy who has put up 22/5/4 on 42% in the playoffs is an upgrade over a guy who puts up 33 6/6 on 49%?
Bron stans intelligence on full display:facepalm[/QUOTE]
Hes an upgrade over Pete Myers. Jordan wasn't on the 94 Bulls.
[QUOTE=97 bulls;14313461]Hes an upgrade over Pete Myers. Jordan wasn't on the 94 Bulls.[/QUOTE]
I truly don't know if DeRozan is an upgrade over him either. Seems like it is initially but when you really think about it i'm not sure it is. All your doing is putting the ball in the hands of a guard who shoots 42%fg and 22% from 3. He's also not a great passer or defender. At least with pete myers the ball is gonna move more because he's not gonna look for his shot that much and he's not gonna play alot. With DeRozan you have to play him alot and make him a focal point of the offense. That's impossible to manage given the way he performs.
[QUOTE=Phoenix;14178459]There are some who argue that the 94 Bulls WITH MJ would lose to the Rockets, so I fail to see how they'd win with DeRozan. The non-troll deduction is DeRozan would boost them past the Knicks and probably the Pacers then lose to the Rockets.[/QUOTE]
That wouldn't make sense. the 1994 Bulls had 3 All-Star players, all at their peak. MJ was in his peak then and if you add a 4th All-Star/All-NBA player, then Houston wouldn't stand a chance.
They struggled to beat the Knicks in 7 games. And Chicago took that Knicks team to 7 games without Jordan. So if you're adding peak MJ to the mix, then the Rockets likely get swept or lose in 5.
1995, however, is a different story. Chicago would have been running on fumes having won 4 titles in a row. They lost Grant and would have had no one to contend Hakeem down low and grab rebounds at a high rate. Also, Houston added Drexler and that team swept a stacked Orlando team.
I'd say Rockets in 6 or 7.
[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14313472]I truly don't know if DeRozan is an upgrade over him either. Seems like it is initially but when you really think about it i'm not sure it is. All your doing is putting the ball in the hands of a guard who shoots 42%fg and 22% from 3. He's also not a great passer or defender. At least with pete myers the ball is gonna move more because he's not gonna look for his shot that much and he's not gonna play alot. With DeRozan you have to play him alot and make him a focal point of the offense. That's impossible to manage given the way he performs.[/QUOTE]
Wow bro. You actually believe Pete Myers has the same impact as Demarr DeRozan? SMH.
With Pippen and Co there, why does DeRozan need to shoot that much? Let's say he takes less shots, and thus becomes more efficient. Perhaps 17 ppg on 47%. Myers was worthless on offense and not much on defense.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14313478]That wouldn't make sense. the 1994 Bulls had 3 All-Star players, all at their peak. MJ was in his peak then and if you add a 4th All-Star/All-NBA player, then Houston wouldn't stand a chance.
They struggled to beat the Knicks in 7 games. And Chicago took that Knicks team to 7 games without Jordan. So if you're adding peak MJ to the mix, then the Rockets likely get swept or lose in 5.
1995, however, is a different story. Chicago would have been running on fumes having won 4 titles in a row. They lost Grant and would have had no one to contend Hakeem down low and grab rebounds at a high rate. Also, Houston added Drexler and that team swept a stacked Orlando team.
I'd say Rockets in 6 or 7.[/QUOTE]
I agree. The 94 Bulls with MN would mollywhomp the Rockets. And I also agree that fatigue, injuries etc may catch up to them by 95. It's the same argument I use for Pippen. All those deep playoff runs catch up to you. Especially in the bruiser 90s
[QUOTE=97 bulls;14313485]Wow bro. You actually believe Pete Myers has the same impact as Demarr DeRozan? SMH.
With Pippen and Co there, why does DeRozan need to shoot that much? Let's say he takes less shots, and thus becomes more efficient. Perhaps 17 ppg on 47%. Myers was worthless on offense and not much on defense.[/QUOTE]
DeRozan is an obvious upgrade, but consider the Knicks would have probably shut him down. The Pacers were the best defense DeRozan saw in the playoffs and he shot 32% in that series. Still though, they likely beat the Knicks and advance to the ECF.
[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14313472][B]I truly don't know if DeRozan is an upgrade over him either[/B]. Seems like it is initially but when you really think about it i'm not sure it is. All your doing is putting the ball in the hands of a guard who shoots 42%fg and 22% from 3. He's also not a great passer or defender. At least with pete myers the ball is gonna move more because he's not gonna look for his shot that much and he's not gonna play alot. With DeRozan you have to play him alot and make him a focal point of the offense. That's impossible to manage given the way he performs.[/QUOTE]
Man, how many shit takes are you gonna have in one month?
[QUOTE=aj1987;14313508]Man, how many shit takes are you gonna have in one month?[/QUOTE]
It's crazy. I didnt know Pete Myers was this highly regarded.
[QUOTE=HoopsNY;14313489]DeRozan is an obvious upgrade, but consider the Knicks would have probably shut him down. The Pacers were the best defense DeRozan saw in the playoffs and he shot 32% in that series. Still though, they likely beat the Knicks and advance to the ECF.[/QUOTE]
Then Pippens gets less defensive attention. And his numbers look better. Much better. And most importantly, they win.
[QUOTE=97 bulls;14313485]Wow bro. You actually believe Pete Myers has the same impact as Demarr DeRozan? SMH.
With Pippen and Co there, why does DeRozan need to shoot that much? Let's say he takes less shots, and thus becomes more efficient. Perhaps 17 ppg on 47%. Myers was worthless on offense and not much on defense.[/QUOTE]
What makes you think DeRozan is gonna be able to do that though. In a easier scoring era he's only shot above 45% for a series twice. Imagine what his efficiency would be in era where it's harder to score. He'd have a career playoff efficiency of below 40% and that's with barely shooting 3's. Do you know how bad that is?
To answer the question though yes i think if he was willing to accept a limited role offensively he'd obviously be a better fit than myers. I don't think he would though. He's a max player who believes he's one of the best. He wouldn't be ok with that role. We've already seen this play out when he was on the Raptors and he was benched for his typical inefficient play and bad defense. [url]https://www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/23419189/demar-derozan-toronto-raptors-frustrated-being-benched-poor-play-game-3[/url]
[QUOTE=97 bulls;14313524]Then Pippens gets less defensive attention. And his numbers look better. Much better. And most importantly, they win.[/QUOTE]
Nah. His numbers weren't crazy alongside MJ, so why would they be with DeRozan? In addition, the Knicks had great on the ball and help defense.
[QUOTE=aj1987;14313508]Man, how many shit takes are you gonna have in one month?[/QUOTE]
Right so you think it's a good a idea to play a guy that would shoot 40% fg who can't pass and can't defend? This is your path to a chip?
DeRozan is clearly better than myers dude it's not about that. Problem with DeRozan is you have to play him and make him a focal point of the offense. This clearly is detrimental to your offense. With myers you don't have to play him at all and you do you don't have to make him the focal point of the offense when he does play.
If you coukd convince DeRozan to take a myers type roll he'd clearly be better. That wouldn't be the case though
[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14313460]A guy who has put up 22/5/4 on 42% in the playoffs is an upgrade over a guy who puts up 33 6/6 on 49%?
Bron stans intelligence on full display:facepalm[/QUOTE]
An upgrade over Pete Myers.
MJ stans insecurities on full display:facepalm
Although now that you mention it....
[QUOTE=Bronbron23;14313544]Right so you think it's a good a idea to play a guy that would shoot 40% fg who can't pass and can't defend? This is your path to a chip?
DeRozan is clearly better than myers dude it's not about that. Problem with DeRozan is you have to play him and make him a focal point of the offense. This clearly is detrimental to your offense. With myers you don't have to play him at all and you do you don't have to make him the focal point of the offense when he does play.
If you coukd convince DeRozan to take a myers type roll he'd clearly be better. That wouldn't be the case though[/QUOTE]
:facepalm