Younger Generation Makes NBA's Future Bright

[Jeffx]

Interesting read. Thought I'd share this with you cats.....

http://www.nba.com/bulls/news/smith_110328.html

[Andrew]

Good read indeed, thanks for the heads up.

I think in terms of talent, the NBA's future is always bright and the game is always going to be in good hands as far as the next generation of players is concerned. We can gripe about Current Star X being overrated and not as good as NBA Legend Y or that certain rules are too favourable - and certainly make some legitimate points - but I think the talent and skill will always be there.

In terms of attitude though, it does seem there is more humility amongst some of the newer stars in the league while there's a greater sense of entitlement amongst the players that came a few years before them. Perhaps the fact that the latter group have been around a bit longer has a little something to do with it, a bit of frustration and maybe some cynicism wearing them down through the years. As Smith points out though, a few of them came into the league with that attitude.

As far as Team USA is concerned, I wouldn't count out guys like LeBron, Wade, Kobe and co just yet but if they were passed over or themselves decided to pass on partaking in the 2012 Olympics, I think the team the USA fields will still be a very strong one. When it's all said and done, I don't think they'd really miss those players on route to another gold medal; there's enough talent to make up for their absence.

[shadowgrin]

Good read except the 'criticism' against Dwight to include him in the 'current stars' is pretty weak.

[NovU]

Add Griffin in the mix and we got great young talents with great attitude. Wall and Cousins not so much tho.

[Andrew]

Good read except the 'criticism' against Dwight to include him in the 'current stars' is pretty weak.

True, Howard's inclusion in that group was a bit iffy. He does complain a bit but like Shaq before him, he takes a beating in the paint and the calls aren't always fair for him (at both ends) owing to his size and strength.

[Lamrock]

Sam Smith is not a very good writer, and it may be because the team he writes for stars one of the league's most overrated players, but his opinions are usually pretty wrong.

In this article, he endorses guys without real personalities like lobotomy victim Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook. While there's nothing wrong with being quiet, (especially Rose, who must focus all of his few brain cells on basketball) but there's something to be said about having actual personalities. It's part of why I enjoy the NBA so much.

Smith also hypocritically lauds Kevin Love (my favorite of this new stable of young stars) even though he has complained quite a bit in Minnesota. Can't say I blame him, but...

[Andrew]

Oh, give me a break.

This hatred and "criticism" you have for Rose was kind of amusing at first, but now it's just annoying. Look, I realise I've got my fair share of bias when it comes to Rose, but you seem determined to downplay him and trot out the overused Internet forum buzzword of "overrated" simply because of this absurd criteria of him not being a brilliant academic or a colourful personality. Granted, that's a fair enough reason to not be a huge fan of him but it's very much getting in the way of you having an objective opinion on his performance and abilities. Considering you're usually very adamant about stats being used to measure a player's performance and value - rightfully so - it strikes me as weird that you'd place such importance on personality in these matters.

As for him being overrated: who exactly is overrating him? And how? Consider some of the things that are being said of Derrick Rose this year. He's having a great season. He's a major part of the Bulls' success.That he's got a case for MVP. He's one of the top players at his position right now. None of those are unreasonable claims. Few (if any) are suggesting he's the best player in the NBA, the best point guard in league history or the best player we've ever seen. I don't know if anyone would claim he's a perfect player or that there isn't still room for improvement.

Such claims would be too much and certainly rating him too high but those are not widely held opinions (though the few who express them may be the most vocal). A minority group of fanboys does not constitute a player being overrated, nor does their academic abilities or your personal opinion of their basketball skills not gelling with those of other observers.

Before the season, you called the Bulls and Rose overrated (there's that buzzword again!), if I recall correctly picking them to finish around fourth or fifth. Now that they're atop the East and having a great season, you're furiously backpedalling and breaking out uninspired snark by referring to Rose as a lobotomy victim and needing to "focus all of his few brain cells on basketball", not to mention coining the "Derrick Blows" moniker which is far from intellectual or creative by any stretch of the imagination. If you're going to continually insinuate someone is stupid, don't stoop to that level.

I've also seen you claim that the referees are helping or will help the Bulls' success (however far they may get) this season, which deftly sidesteps any admission of "You know what, maybe I wasn't completely right about them". Never mind that their top scorer frequently gets to the hoop where there's going to be contact, they're not in the top ten in free throw attempts and teams like the Cavaliers and Clippers get more foul shots than the Bulls on a nightly basis. No, the league is rigging things for the Bulls and their drooling moron of an overrated star! Come on.

When the subject of Rose's importance to the Bulls was brought up in a discussion last year, you dismissed the idea that he was their most valuable player deeming him the second most important Bull at best, while citing win shares. Whether or not win shares are an infallible measure of a player's importance to their team is a whole other debate in itself but assuming for a moment they are, Rose tops the Bulls in that department this year. For what it's worth, he's also sixth in the league. By your own standards, Rose is more important than you're giving him credit for.

As far as Smith's opinions being wrong (assuming in fact opinions can be right or wrong), aside from the ludicrous notion that writing chiefly about a player and team you don't think highly of somehow makes him a poor writer and clueless about basketball, it also basically says that you hold your opinions as fact. I respect standing by your opinion, but none of us are infallible. Aside from your predictions for the Bulls this season, I also recall you being pretty scathing about the possibility Kevin Durant would be a star and picking the Mavericks to fall apart as a result of the Jason Kidd trade (if anything they're ultimately about the same, another 50+ win season and a playoff appearance). We've all been "pretty wrong" at one time or another.

I can't help but feel a lot of your anti-Rose sentiment is pure hype backlash, borne of the notion that because a lot of people are describing him as a really good player, lauding the season he's having and much has been written and said about him, that it must be wrong and the opposing view is the truth the stupid masses are too blind to see. That's not to say there aren't valid criticisms that can't be made of Rose but at times your critique reminds me of people who hate mainstream music (or for that matter, mainstream anything) simply because it's mainstream and cluck their tongues at those poor stupid fools who desperately need to learn the truth of the matter.

You seem have a lot of preconceived notions about Rose and it would also seem that anything he does isn't going to change your opinion. That's no more an objective view of him than I hold as a fan, though I will concede he's not a colourful personality or brilliant intellectual. Fair enough if you don't like him or find him entertaining to watch or see interviewed for those reasons. That's your right and I see where you're coming from, but it does seem to cloud your judgement of him as a player.

Going back to Smith's article, it's possible to poke holes in it but his underlying point about preening personalities and admiring less boisterous players is a valid point of view. His other point - that if some of the other players with more jarring personalities that reportedly wore a little thin during the 2008 Olympics were left off the 2012 Team USA squad, there's enough talent elsewhere to get the job done - also has a lot of merit.

I doubt this is the last time we'll clash in our opinions of Rose, I doubt we'll ever see eye to eye as far as he's concerned, but as far as all this "Derrick Blows" and lobotomy victim stuff, it might be time to get some new material.

[Lamrock]

I had this coming, and I'm glad I got it in such an eloquent, respectful form.

My ability to articulate my views are not to the level of some on here, and I'm not going to use that as an excuse. It is indeed Rose's personality that makes me not a fan of his, and is my biggest problem with this article. I have also unsuccessfully (because it was stupid!) used his apparent lack of intellect as a way to endorse less athletic, more intelligent players such as my favorite, Steve Nash.

I say he's overrated because he is the favorite for MVP and I simply think that is wrong. He's easily had an All-NBA season, but you see Dwight Howard absolutely carrying his team on both ends of the court, but not winning it because his teammates are terrible. Meanwhile, Rose has been very important to the Bulls, but I think the real reason they are this good is Thibodeau. Rose's contributions are primarily to the 13th ranked defense, which Carlos Boozer and other solid role players are a part of. Rose has had a great season, but his usage would make Isiah very jealous.

I'll eat some crow here. I do think Rose is worthy of the Most Improved Player award, fully deserved to start in the all-star game and should be on an all-NBA team. Thibs is the coach of the year, and I severely underrated the Bulls and overrated the Bucks. Rose's improvement has culminated in his leading the team in win shares (a flawed, but good metric in which Rose, being a guard, is admittedly at a disadvantage) and he is the most important player on the team at this point. However, the most important part of the Bulls, in my opinion, is Tom Thibodeau.

The small market team fan bitterness... (implying the refs would favor Chicago in the postseason) I'll give you that. And I also understand the irony in my using elementary jokes to insult Rose's intelligence. I, like pretty much everybody, am extremely jealous of Derrick Rose - and why wouldn't you be? I don't think Rose is the best player in the league, but I'm willing to concede that you are right in my going too far to indict him.

I'm not the most popular member in these forums, and for good reason. As I scrolled down your post and slowly bought more and more into your opinion, I've realized that I've worn out my welcome on these boards, trying to be benji-lite but coming across as a total douche here, being a little bitch in the General Chat forums, and being like Thierry but worse in the Association ones.

I formally apologize to the NLSC and vow to be a better poster in the future.

[/coldmedicine]

[kibaxx7]

Just gonna say one thing. I'm starting my sports journalism career (not a joke; it happened before with that Blazers blog fiasco, I'm sure you all remember and I'm not gonna do all that shite again)... and in every single class (of course) they make you re-write, re-write, re-write and re-write stuff.

This post, two above me, Andrew -- both you and Lamrock are sharing your opinions, but I understood every single word, and where you were aiming to with all the facts, and that's the style of writing I'm aiming for. Just wanted to say that. Props.

[x-uNdErRaTeD-z]

Sam Smith is not a very good writer, and it may be because the team he writes for stars one of the league's most overrated players, but his opinions are usually pretty wrong.

In this article, he endorses guys without real personalities like lobotomy victim Derrick Rose and Russell Westbrook. While there's nothing wrong with being quiet, (especially Rose, who must focus all of his few brain cells on basketball) but there's something to be said about having actual personalities. It's part of why I enjoy the NBA so much.

Smith also hypocritically lauds Kevin Love (my favorite of this new stable of young stars) even though he has complained quite a bit in Minnesota. Can't say I blame him, but...

Why do you think Derrick Rose is stupid in real life? In terms of this generation, I would go with Durant/Rose instead of Love. They are humble, quiet, and they shutup and play basketball. Love does the same but he gets really cocky and ignorant at times in his interviews. Young teen basketball players need to lookup to guys like Durant/Rose so they can develop a similar style of humbleness and personality rather than an cocky/ignorant. Watching these stars practicing and continuing to get better, will only benefit this up and coming generation to have the will to get better. Reasons why I love Kobe/LeBron's games but I hate their personality.

EDIT: And when were opinions wrong or right? I thought that everybody is entitled to their opinion and truely there is no right or wrong in opinions (going a bit far with this but fuck it).

[x-uNdErRaTeD-z]

I love when Rose has Keith Bogans, Kurt Thomas, and Taj Gibson starting games for half of the season with other important players out and the Bulls still winning and beating top teams. Rose literally carries them offensively and with Thibs in the defensive end. You do have a point with coach Thibs but there's a reason why we have a coach of the year award.

Hey but no harms. You don't have to apologize at all, it's something we all do in life is to: make mistakes. Good thing you understood because if this was imefimef, he would literally debate with anyone till death without realizing he's wrong.

[shadowgrin]

your critique reminds me of people who hate mainstream music (or for that matter, mainstream anything) simply because it's mainstream.

I just lol'd. Sorry Lamrock.

as far as all this "Derrick Blows"...it might be time to get some new material

It should stay, it's perfect! It lends itself even for praising Rose.
Derrick Blows (by) [insert defender's name who got his ankles crossed or made into a fool]. See.

trying to be benji-lite but coming across as a total douche here

benji isn't a douche?! That's news to me.
Trying to be benji, WTF man?! Stop drinking and maybe you'll get your head straight about that ass benji.
And I mean ass.

I formally apologize to the NLSC and vow to be a better poster in the future.

For fuck's sake, you live in Seattle. Just blame it on the weather. It's acceptable.

P.S. Drugs, Courtney Love, or inner turmoil didn't kill Kurt. The goddamn weather did

Why do you think Derrick Rose is stupid in real life?

Academically, he is (subjectively).

when were opinions wrong or right? I thought that everybody is entitled to their opinion and truely there is no right or wrong in opinions (going a bit far with this but fuck it).

Opinions can be wrong if you view it based on a relatively personal standard.
There are truly wrong opinions though, imo. Those that don't support itself with any logic or reason.
In my opinion the Jews deserved what they got during WWII. My only defense/reason is that statement itself and that it's my opinion. You still think it's not wrong?

[The X]

I agree with Lamrock that the new coach is the biggest reason for the Bulls surprisingly being at the top of the East. I'd say coach is reason 1, Rose is reason 1a. Who would've thought that they could do it with so many injuries (Noah & Boozer missing a chunk of time) and with Bogans starting at SG? Not many, so I've got to give Rose credit.

That being said, would I give Rose the MVP nod over Lebron or Howard? No. Is he All-NBA 1st Team? Yes, without a doubt.

As for article, I didn't mind it. I like the young guys coming through, who seem to be a bit more humble. Whilst not a fan of Rose, I have appreciated him a little more in the last year in the fact he didn't try to suck up Lebron's arse and he trying to forge his own identity and make the Bulls a winner. I can respect that.

Why do you think Derrick Rose is stupid in real life?

Probably because he cheated on his SAT and got Memphis' trip to NCAA title game stripped from the record books. Really, he's the type of player that ruins the college system & should be going straight from high school to the pros, if it weren't for the mandatory year out of high school rule.

So yep, I'm admittedly not a fan of Rose either. I obviously know he's a very good player, but don't like him because the idea of somebody cheating in an exam. If it is true, which all reports seem to indicated, he cheated and let down the college and its fans. I know he's not the only player who has done it, he's just one of the few that got caught.

[x-uNdErRaTeD-z]

Why do you think Derrick Rose is stupid in real life?

Probably because he cheated on his SAT and got Memphis' trip to NCAA title game stripped from the record books. Really, he's the type of player that ruins the college system & should be going straight from high school to the pros, if it weren't for the mandatory year out of high school rule.

So yep, I'm admittedly not a fan of Rose either. I obviously know he's a very good player, but don't like him because the idea of somebody cheating in an exam. If it is true, which all reports seem to indicated, he cheated and let down the college and its fans. I know he's not the only player who has done it, he's just one of the few that got caught.[/quote]


Oh I didn't know that actually. Thanks for informing me lol. I guess he was stupid but I can't blame him for being a great basketball player. Dude got talent.

[shadowgrin]

the new coach is the biggest reason for the Bulls surprisingly being at the top of the East. I'd say coach is reason 1, Rose is reason 1a. Who would've thought that they could do it with so many injuries (Noah & Boozer missing a chunk of time) and with Bogans starting at SG? Not many, so I've got to give Rose credit.

A Rose does not Equal Love

Chicago has had the fewest “bad” players suit up for them. Furthermore, the Bulls have had a remarkably low 1,215 minutes allocated to those “bad” players. This is a whopping 700 fewer than the next closest team (the San Antonio Spurs).

Now let’s also take a quick look at Minnesota. The Timberwolves have had 13 “bad” players. These players have played over 12,000 minutes and combined to offer -10.0 Wins Produced.

What does all this mean? Not only does Derrick Rose have some very productive teammates (think Carlos Boozer, Joakim Noah, Ronnie Brewer, etc. . .), unlike other teams he hasn’t had to play with many “bad” players. In contrast, when Kevin Love looks around the locker room, “bad” players are everywhere.

How did Chicago do this? The front office essentially followed a very good formula: keep all of the team’s good players from 2009-10 and get most of the good players from Utah. This formula has produced a very good team.

Unfortunately in the NBA, all of the regular season awards are individual based. This means Derrick Rose will get the credit for what was essentially a team effort. While it is worth virtually nothing, I would like to award the Chicago Bulls with the Most Valuable Team award this season and reiterate that Rose is not the MVP.

Some might argue that Chicago’s players are essentially “not bad” because of Rose and/or Coach Thibodeau. But if we look at the productivity of these players this season and what these veterans did in 2009-10, we see that this team’s results are not surprising.

In sum, we don’t need to argue that this team is succeeding because of its dynamic point guard or amazing coach. The Bulls story is really about choosing productive players. And the Bulls – as the study into “bad” players indicates – have been very good at making these choices.

[Jackal]

Rose is going to win it, but watching Howard play on that team & battle the way he does...I'd definitely pick Howard as my MVP.

[Andrew]

Can't say fairer than that, Lamrock.

I'd still disagree that Rose getting the nod over Howard makes Rose overrated, I think he's worthy of being considered a favourite/frontrunner for the award (whether or not he should be the favourite/frontrunner is certainly open to debate) so it's not unreasonable if he wins it this year. I do think Howard makes a great case as well though, both he and Rose have had great seasons amidst some uncertainty with their team's rosters - injuries for the Bulls, retooling on the fly for the Magic - and managed to keep them winning games despite the setbacks.

While on the subject of Rose and Howard, they've also both made some impressive strides with their game; Rose's jumpshot still has room for improvement but it's a lot more reliable, especially from long range. Howard's work with The Dream seems to have paid off as he's showing us a little more in his offensive repertoire. I really like that they've put in that work.

I would certainly agree that Thibodeau is a big reason for the Bulls' success this season, but that shouldn't take away from what Rose has done or what he's meant to the team. As far as the points made by "A Rose does not Equal Love", two very important players mentioned in Noah and Boozer have missed a significant amount of time; almost half the season in Noah's case. I see where that article is coming from but I think it also disqualifies most of the MVPs in league history with that criteria.

[NovU]

Maybe I'm just not a believer of Love's super stats but anyways,
I find that the article actually tries way too hard to make Rose look bad while making Love look good.
The guy's pretty much making a MVP case for Love.
Love I doubt he could do the same on a good team where there are better players around him who can easily take his shares of rebounds and points. He could barely be 20-10 guy I'd say. Besides, he can't block shots or defend anyone. He ain't that athletic either.

[shadowgrin]

I find that the article actually tries way too hard to make Rose look bad while making Love look good.
The guy's pretty much making a MVP case for Love.

What? If anything, there wasn't anything much said about Love except earlier in the article.
I was disappointed with it because the focus was on Rose and the Bulls and not the expected detailed comparison between Love and Rose. Misleading title.

Besides, he can't block shots or defend anyone. He ain't that athletic either.

Block shots, defense? Worked well for Amare without having those.
Athleticism? He plays a position were athleticism isn't really a required commodity, that's why you see big stiffs as starters in most teams.
See also Bird, Nash, Yao, or any good players that didn't rely on athleticism.

[NovU]

Very misleading title. Pretty much trying to bring Rose down to Love's level.

And we all know what Amare's about and whatnot. He widely gets criticized by not being able to guard a dead body. Same case for Love. I just get the notion people focusing way too much on Love's stats and I was just stating what he's not and not capable of.

BTW I don't like the names on your posts for the comparison to Love. Bird was the best shooter ever with perhaps the highest bball IQ ever with height, Nash has speed, great moves and Canadian citizenship, and we all know Yao's got the height that nobody had except 2 or 3 in history. All Love got is the strength with avg height, avg arm length, avg body. He knows how to position himself for rebounds, that I can give him credits for. But again, I would like to see him getting those super numbers on a better team with better teammates around him. Till then I won't be that much convinced whenever he's in the discussion with current NBA elites.

[shadowgrin]

I know, wrong? players to mention alongside Love. Point is athleticism is overrated (unless the player knows how to use it properly) and previous players had gone on to be good (or in the case of the players I listed, great) players without having the need or reliance on athleticism. Love pretty much knows his athletic limitations and does away with what he has resulting in his numbers/production.

Very misleading title. Pretty much trying to bring Rose down to Love's level.

He didn't even try. There's even nowhere near of Love being compared to Rose as players but more so on their respective teams, even more so for the Bulls in that article. I found his argument for Love at least being considered for MVP lacking for me. Only point he made was Love is surrounded by bad players, which isn't even true because he has Darko.

Nash has speed, great moves and Canadian citizenship

That's Nash's greatest flaw. It's not his lack of defense, since he compensates for it with his basketball IQ. He led the league seasons ago in charges called.

Yao's got the height that nobody had except 2 or 3 in history

You make it sound that Yao was (is?) successful only because of his height.
It's more than that, Yao knows how to use his height and has good fundamentals. Can't say the same for other players above 7 feet that didn't make a dent for their respective teams.

[koberulz]

Love I doubt he could do the same on a good team where there are better players around him who can easily take his shares of rebounds and points. He could barely be 20-10 guy I'd say.

Does that matter?

[NovU]

I know, wrong? players to mention alongside Love. Point is athleticism is overrated (unless the player knows how to use it properly)

Yeah, and all I was saying is that Love isn't. Didn't see the needs for you to explain that but thanks.

He didn't even try. There's even nowhere near of Love being compared to Rose as players but more so on their respective teams,

What? The title itself did enough. Nowhere being compared? They were implicitly compared with their effects to own teams.

It's not his lack of defense, since he compensates for it with his basketball IQ. He led the league seasons ago in charges called.

You make it sound that Yao was (is?) successful only because of his height.
It's more than that, Yao knows how to use his height and has good fundamentals. Can't say the same for other players above 7 feet that didn't make a dent for their respective teams.

Ok... point was that Love doesn't have that true color(advantages/skillsets) that makes him shine like other players you mentioned above. Like I said, maybe I am just not a fan of him yet, but his best advantage over others seem to be the strength and knowing how to position himself for the rebound for right now. And as Jae claimed before, there are saying that he sacrifices defence for rebounds time to time.

[puttincomputers]

I am tired of this whole thing about Rose being a dunce because of a low scholastic IQ. If any of you would take an IQ test you would know that an IQ test actually has two scores. One part is physical and the other is scholastic. What Rose lacks in scholarly IQ I make up for (116). What I lack in physical IQ (54) he makes up for! I will never be able to match his athletic skills. (my overall IQ is 114 btw)

Comparing athletic IQ to Scholarly IQ is like comparing Apples to Lemons. An apple is crisp and sweet while a lemon is juicy and tart.

[shadowgrin]

The title itself did enough. Nowhere being compared? They were implicitly compared with their effects to own teams.

That's your take on the title, but like I said, the title is misleading. Also, I couldn't care less about the title, it's what's written in the article that's important. Their effects to their own teams wasn't even (implicitly) compared, or at least based on my expectations.

If any of you would take an IQ test you would know that an IQ test actually has two scores. One part is physical and the other is scholastic.

8 types of "quotient" actually, iirc my psycho class. Physical and intelligence are just two of them.
There are also different types of tests for each quotient. An 'intelligence quotient' test isn't the same as a 'physical quotient?' test.
So even though Rose surely has a very high 'physical quotient?', we can't say the same for his 'intelligence quotient' or IQ.