PDA

View Full Version : Replace 2011 Derrick Rose with 2003 Tmac - How far do the Bulls go?



JordansBulls
07-12-2017, 06:59 PM
Replace 2011 Derrick Rose with 2003 Tmac - How far do the Bulls go?

Original Lineup
PG Rose
SG Bogans
SF Deng
PF Boozer
C Noah

New Lineup
PG CJ Watson
SG Tmac
SF Deng
PF Boozer
C Noah

cmellofan15
07-12-2017, 07:00 PM
why isn't the lottery an option?

GREATNESS ONE
07-12-2017, 07:08 PM
Lol

WaDe03
07-12-2017, 07:13 PM
No further than they did. Wade and them boy would've smacked the dog **** out of them like they did the Bulls.

mightybosstone
07-12-2017, 07:16 PM
No further than they ended up going. Peak T-Mac was absolutely a better player than peak Rose, but not so much better that it would have gotten that Bulls team past the Lebron/Wade/Bosh trio in their prime. That Bulls team was still a piece away from having a shot, and they still would have been if you swapped Rose out with McGrady.

Chronz
07-12-2017, 08:16 PM
They would have won. Casuals are misdirected by looking at the sweep instead of how close each game was and how much D-Rose choked. Tmac makes them better on both ends and it gives them a better outlet shooter in peak CJ Watson. That Heat team was flawed and in Y1, I'd take 2 teams outside of these Bulls over them.

WaDe03
07-12-2017, 08:25 PM
They would have won. Casuals are misdirected by looking at the sweep instead of how close each game was and how much D-Rose choked. Tmac makes them better on both ends and it gives them a better outlet shooter in peak CJ Watson. That Heat team was flawed and in Y1, I'd take 2 teams outside of these Bulls over them.

Not a chance lol.

mightybosstone
07-12-2017, 08:31 PM
They would have won. Casuals are misdirected by looking at the sweep instead of how close each game was and how much D-Rose choked. Tmac makes them better on both ends and it gives them a better outlet shooter in peak CJ Watson. That Heat team was flawed and in Y1, I'd take 2 teams outside of these Bulls over them.

When I saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder how long it will take before Chronz proclaims that the Bulls would have won?" I know you're a huge McGrady fan, and I agree he was a much better player at his peak than Rose. But who's to say T-Mac plays substantially better against a team with multiple elite perimeter defenders like Miami? We never even got a chance to see T-Mac in the second round of the playoffs, so his postseason sample size is insanely limited.

Also, I never buy the whole "the series was close because each individual game was close" argument. A sweep is a sweep. If the Bulls couldn't win a single game in the series despite having home court advantage, they weren't that close to Miami. The Heat were certainly flawed, and that proved to be true against the Mavericks in the next series. But I don't see that Chicago team suddenly going from losing four straight to winning four of seven solely on the different in talent between Rose and T-Mac.

Shammyguy3
07-12-2017, 10:41 PM
When I saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder how long it will take before Chronz proclaims that the Bulls would have won?" I know you're a huge McGrady fan, and I agree he was a much better player at his peak than Rose. But who's to say T-Mac plays substantially better against a team with multiple elite perimeter defenders like Miami? We never even got a chance to see T-Mac in the second round of the playoffs, so his postseason sample size is insanely limited.

Also, I never buy the whole "the series was close because each individual game was close" argument. A sweep is a sweep. If the Bulls couldn't win a single game in the series despite having home court advantage, they weren't that close to Miami. The Heat were certainly flawed, and that proved to be true against the Mavericks in the next series. But I don't see that Chicago team suddenly going from losing four straight to winning four of seven solely on the different in talent between Rose and T-Mac.

Uh, the Bulls were not swept.....

Chronz
07-12-2017, 10:48 PM
I was just like a kid, like, in a candy shop. Id get wide open 3s, I could just run up and down the court, get wide open layups. I was basically begging him. I was like, yo, this would be nice.

Let's go back to bashing kd yes

mightybosstone
07-12-2017, 11:22 PM
Uh, the Bulls were not swept.....
My apologies for misremembering. I just remember that the series wasn't that close, and I was quoting Chronz's post. Should have double checked for myself.

I was just like a kid, like, in a candy shop. Id get wide open 3s, I could just run up and down the court, get wide open layups. I was basically begging him. I was like, yo, this would be nice.

Let's go back to bashing kd yes
Wut?

JAZZNC
07-13-2017, 12:02 AM
When I saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder how long it will take before Chronz proclaims that the Bulls would have won?" I know you're a huge McGrady fan, and I agree he was a much better player at his peak than Rose. But who's to say T-Mac plays substantially better against a team with multiple elite perimeter defenders like Miami? We never even got a chance to see T-Mac in the second round of the playoffs, so his postseason sample size is insanely limited.

Also, I never buy the whole "the series was close because each individual game was close" argument. A sweep is a sweep. If the Bulls couldn't win a single game in the series despite having home court advantage, they weren't that close to Miami. The Heat were certainly flawed, and that proved to be true against the Mavericks in the next series. But I don't see that Chicago team suddenly going from losing four straight to winning four of seven solely on the different in talent between Rose and T-Mac.

This...Chronz definitely has a medium bendable at the mere mention of T-Mac.

TrueFan420
07-13-2017, 12:16 AM
I was just like a kid, like, in a candy shop. Id get wide open 3s, I could just run up and down the court, get wide open layups. I was basically begging him. I was like, yo, this would be nice.

Let's go back to bashing kd yes
Chronz, what youve just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

WaDe03
07-13-2017, 09:18 AM
Chronz with the direct KD quote, I like it. No matter what the topic may be, never forget KD is the biggest ***** in sports history. Thank you for pointing us back in the right direction, Chronz.

basch152
07-13-2017, 09:52 AM
When I saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder how long it will take before Chronz proclaims that the Bulls would have won?" I know you're a huge McGrady fan, and I agree he was a much better player at his peak than Rose. But who's to say T-Mac plays substantially better against a team with multiple elite perimeter defenders like Miami? We never even got a chance to see T-Mac in the second round of the playoffs, so his postseason sample size is insanely limited.

Also, I never buy the whole "the series was close because each individual game was close" argument. A sweep is a sweep. If the Bulls couldn't win a single game in the series despite having home court advantage, they weren't that close to Miami. The Heat were certainly flawed, and that proved to be true against the Mavericks in the next series. But I don't see that Chicago team suddenly going from losing four straight to winning four of seven solely on the different in talent between Rose and T-Mac.

I completely disagree with this.

A sweep with losing each game by 3 or less points would be a closer series than a 6 game series where the losing team lost all 4 games by 15+.

In the sweep the team could've changed one play each game to win the series.

The second setup they would have had to have played drastically better in at least 2 more game to have won.

mightybosstone
07-13-2017, 03:56 PM
Chronz, what youve just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Back in the day, my go-to was to post this "Billy Madison" clip in response to PSD trolls and idiots, but I had to save it for the truly stupid stuff. I respect the move, but I gotta take points away for not linking the video instead and for using it kind of a "meh" situation.

TrueFan420
07-13-2017, 05:26 PM
Back in the day, my go-to was to post this "Billy Madison" clip in response to PSD trolls and idiots, but I had to save it for the truly stupid stuff. I respect the move, but I gotta take points away for not linking the video instead and for using it kind of a "meh" situation.

Hahah I ****ing love that movie and hadn't seen it referenced in ages so I couldn't help myself. Another gem is, "if pissing in you pants is cool then call me Miles Davis"

I posted on the go from my phone... didn't have time for a video link. Next time I'm will...

Chronz
07-14-2017, 11:58 AM
Chronz with the direct KD quote, I like it. No matter what the topic may be, never forget KD is the biggest ***** in sports history. Thank you for pointing us back in the right direction, Chronz.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OdXx8KgnOU


Chronz, what youve just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OdXx8KgnOU

Chronz
07-14-2017, 12:38 PM
I completely disagree with this.

A sweep with losing each game by 3 or less points would be a closer series than a 6 game series where the losing team lost all 4 games by 15+.

In the sweep the team could've changed one play each game to win the series.

The second setup they would have had to have played drastically better in at least 2 more game to have won.

Bingo. Deep down inside, MBT knows this to be true. I've seen him reference the Rockets loss to the Blazers as being a series that could have played out differently if we replayed the series. These claims have to be based on probabilistic standards and I've never heard of any statistician/analysts completely ignore how close the games were and just chalk the final score up to a concrete sign.

Like if we replayed the Celtics-Hawks series that went 7 the year they won the Chip, Im sure there are a couple of sweeps in there. Just as Im sure those 7 games weren't tougher than 6 vs the Lakers/Pistons.

Wrigheyes4MVP
07-14-2017, 01:18 PM
No further than they did. Wade and them boy would've smacked the dog **** out of them like they did the Bulls.

You mean Lebron and them boys

SteBO
07-14-2017, 01:21 PM
You mean Lebron and them boys
No he really means Wade.....it marked the last year of his physical prime, and he wasn't great that series. LBJ on the other hand was about as physically dominant as I've ever seen him.

WaDe03
07-14-2017, 02:45 PM
You mean Lebron and them boys

I mean Wade, our best player that year.

Chronz
07-14-2017, 02:50 PM
When I saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder how long it will take before Chronz proclaims that the Bulls would have won?" I know you're a huge McGrady fan, and I agree he was a much better player at his peak than Rose. But who's to say T-Mac plays substantially better against a team with multiple elite perimeter defenders like Miami? We never even got a chance to see T-Mac in the second round of the playoffs, so his postseason sample size is insanely limited.

Also, I never buy the whole "the series was close because each individual game was close" argument. A sweep is a sweep. If the Bulls couldn't win a single game in the series despite having home court advantage, they weren't that close to Miami. The Heat were certainly flawed, and that proved to be true against the Mavericks in the next series. But I don't see that Chicago team suddenly going from losing four straight to winning four of seven solely on the different in talent between Rose and T-Mac.
When I first saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder who's gonna give me **** for speaking truth, I bet its going to be that blasted MBT". I dont see anyone who could check peak Tmac on this squad, I've seen how much it takes to slow the guy down at his best and that was under the old defensive rules so Y1 Miami isn't really that scary. Give the guy a greater sample of games and he will undoubtedly experience an efficiency boost as a result of being on a superior teams and not having to carry scrubs the way he has on both ends throughout his run of dominance.

I would agree on the sample size issue if there were high variance the way we saw with Harden throughout or if Tmac ever had the team and failed them, but if hes consistently overachieving whilst facing the toughest of defensive environments, then chances are that if he gets a chance to actually have the advantage (the way superstars on superior teams can), hes going to be even more effective sorta how Harden looked miserable statistically in his first round losses but looked like a darling when his teams made the conference Finals even if he wasn't all that great subjectively. Playing in the first round against superior teams isn't an advantage for Tmac, that he still elevates his play on both ends is a testament to his greatness, he would have CRUSHED IT had he just had the team during his absolute apex. Giving him better teammates and ******** opponents dont hurt him one iota IMO. He was a TRUE Star, imagine the near athleticism/vision of LeBron with the skill of Kobe. Perfection


Subjectively, I remember Peak Wade just not being able to handle old man Tmac in Houston, Bron does better against smaller players or slower swings, not the lanky quick first step guys who could shoot over the top. Like it took 2003 rules+Tayshaun+Ben Wallace to really stop Tmac with the most laughable cast supporting him. The guy was capable of swinging a series, especially one in which the games were this close. Maybe Miami still wins but its damn close.

WaDe03
07-14-2017, 03:04 PM
It's not close. TMac doesn't move the needle much. He would've been the 3rd best player in that series, just like Rose was. That's if he can get out of the 1st round for the first time in his career and also get out of the 2nd after that.

Chronz
07-14-2017, 03:52 PM
It's not close. TMac doesn't move the needle much. He would've been the 3rd best player in that series, just like Rose was. That's if he can get out of the 1st round for the first time in his career and also get out of the 2nd after that.

I heard that from people who said Dirk was like the 3rd best player in his series before it began and the HEAT still lost. Tmac doesn't need to move the needle that much, that he does, makes it much closer than you think. And I contest your opinion that he would've been the 3rd best player. LOL @ the first round comment as if that holds any merit, Wade was losing in R.1 in far less impressive fashion when he was carrying the kind of cast Tmac wishes he had.

Put it this way, Tmac was a first ballot HOF despite NO playoff success, no longevity and no MVP's, its cuz he was that ****ing good and carried that much crap throughout. Tmac has made it to the Finals BTW

Chronz
07-14-2017, 03:56 PM
Again, show me ANY player that was as productive as Tmac whilst being as SKILLED. He truly was the player who combined the best abilities of all the talented swings Ive seen since MJ. Kobe was skilled AF, but he lacked the vision and the overall athleticism that amounted to the production of a Bron/Wade. Bron/Wade were athletic and productive AF but lacked the overall skill game that allowed them to dominate a wide array of areas on the court. TMAC LACKED NOTHING. He was every bit the athlete anyone before him had ever been AND he had ALL the skills. If the dude never had scoliosis or whatever, he would have maintained his elite level of play for longer than 4-5 years.

Ebbs
07-14-2017, 04:37 PM
They still lose to the Heat but it's closer. LeBron doesn't muscle and bully McGrady like he did Rose.

Chronz
07-14-2017, 04:54 PM
D-Rose was a straight up attacker and midrange gunner, Tmac had range for days and if Bron dared to chest him up, would blow right by him. The ONLY way to stop Tmac wasn't the way it was to stop Bron (at least in 2011), which was to put smaller guys on him, dare him to post up or shoot from afar as Bron lacked an in between game that Tmac would have feasted against with his skillset. And it wasn't the way to stop Kobe, by swarming him until he gets tired of passing and insists on shooting or taking over what the defense gave him, at least for much of his career. Tmac wins the title that Bron couldn't alongside Wade I know that for sure. Tmac never had a problem looking to score and with basically 2 PG's in Wade/Bron would've worked much better. Tmac was a true Point Forward, the kind of guy who could play off another ball handler and spread the floor or create for others with the ball. SERIOUSLY GUYS. Show me a player not named MJ who had ever proven that. The best you have is Durant and aside from lacking the same floor vision, we all know became a *****. Gimme a man who wants to take on the best with his own squad rather than joining the best ****ing team available. What a ****ing coward mates

Chronz
07-14-2017, 04:58 PM
Can we put KD up there with Einstein as the greatest cons in world history? I say yes

WaDe03
07-14-2017, 06:13 PM
Goodness lol. Chronz you may be a bigger TMac homer than I am Wade homer and that's saying a lot lol.

WaDe03
07-14-2017, 06:42 PM
Chronz, the other night after that Espys skit that was staged KD tweeted the straight faced emoji to play with the whole subject even more. This guy made the biggest ***** move in sports history and has basically has accepted that he's a big ***** and can't even deny his *****ness anymore. How do you feel about him openly being the biggest vagina? How do you feel about him? What does this mean for his vagina?

mightybosstone
07-14-2017, 08:17 PM
When I first saw this thread, I literally thought "I wonder who's gonna give me **** for speaking truth, I bet its going to be that blasted MBT". I dont see anyone who could check peak Tmac on this squad, I've seen how much it takes to slow the guy down at his best and that was under the old defensive rules so Y1 Miami isn't really that scary. Give the guy a greater sample of games and he will undoubtedly experience an efficiency boost as a result of being on a superior teams and not having to carry scrubs the way he has on both ends throughout his run of dominance.
You're acting as if that Chicago team was stacked. The second best player on that team was probably Noah or Deng. McGrady played with Yao ****ing Ming and never got out of the first round. Believe me. I remember all too well. And those Rockets teams were not very deep before Morey came along, but let's not pretend the guy got zero help in his career.


I would agree on the sample size issue if there were high variance the way we saw with Harden throughout or if Tmac ever had the team and failed them, but if hes consistently overachieving whilst facing the toughest of defensive environments, then chances are that if he gets a chance to actually have the advantage (the way superstars on superior teams can), hes going to be even more effective sorta how Harden looked miserable statistically in his first round losses but looked like a darling when his teams made the conference Finals even if he wasn't all that great subjectively. Playing in the first round against superior teams isn't an advantage for Tmac, that he still elevates his play on both ends is a testament to his greatness, he would have CRUSHED IT had he just had the team during his absolute apex. Giving him better teammates and ******** opponents dont hurt him one iota IMO. He was a TRUE Star, imagine the near athleticism/vision of LeBron with the skill of Kobe. Perfection
COULD he have been a postseason stud with a larger sample size? Sure. But he didn't. You're dealing in complete hypotheticals here, and you're trying to justify the improvement of a single player for an inferior team beating a superior team in the playoffs. T-Mac wasn't going to make Noah suddenly not suck in that series. Also, CJ Watson was not good, and inserting him into the lineup does not help Chicago's case.

They were outmatched from a talent standpoint, and it showed. The talent increase from Rose to T-Mac does not fix that. Now, if you had added peak T-Mac to that Chicago squad with Rose still on it, that would be another story. That team more than likely defeats the Heat in that series and goes on to win a title. But that's not what we're debating.


Subjectively, I remember Peak Wade just not being able to handle old man Tmac in Houston, Bron does better against smaller players or slower swings, not the lanky quick first step guys who could shoot over the top. Like it took 2003 rules+Tayshaun+Ben Wallace to really stop Tmac with the most laughable cast supporting him. The guy was capable of swinging a series, especially one in which the games were this close. Maybe Miami still wins but its damn close.
Close games do not necessarily make a close series. The Rockets' series with the Thunder last season saw games 2-5 decided by a total of 16 points, but I didn't consider it close. Now, would the Bulls have had a better chance to beat the Heat with peak T-Mac instead of peak Rose? Sure. Could they feasibly have done it? OK, I'll buy that, too. But in a hypothetical situation like this, you have to go with the odds. And if that hypothetical Bulls team played that Heat team 100 times, that Miami squad is absolutely winning 51+ games.

JordansBulls
07-14-2017, 09:28 PM
No he really means Wade.....it marked the last year of his physical prime, and he wasn't great that series. LBJ on the other hand was about as physically dominant as I've ever seen him.

Lebron really wasn't all that great in that series. He averaged nearly 26 ppg on 45% FG. Bosh was the one that was spectacular. 23 ppg on 60% FG.

Chronz
07-15-2017, 12:09 PM
Goodness lol. Chronz you may be a bigger TMac homer than I am Wade homer and that's saying a lot lol.

Thank you brother

Chronz
07-15-2017, 12:11 PM
Chronz, the other night after that Espys skit that was staged KD tweeted the straight faced emoji to play with the whole subject even more. This guy made the biggest ***** move in sports history and has basically has accepted that he's a big ***** and can't even deny his *****ness anymore. How do you feel about him openly being the biggest vagina? How do you feel about him? What does this mean for his vagina?

It was staged? Dude looked bothered but yeah I fear for his vag. It may be time to snip snip the tubes cuz at this point everyone is riding it.

Chronz
07-15-2017, 12:39 PM
You're acting as if that Chicago team was stacked.
Nah, I just know it was better than the narrative that won Rose his undeserved MVP. Its a team capable of winning at a level Tmac's teams have never been capable of without him thats for sure.



The second best player on that team was probably Noah or Deng. McGrady played with Yao ****ing Ming and never got out of the first round. Believe me. I remember all too well. And those Rockets teams were not very deep before Morey came along, but let's not pretend the guy got zero help in his career.

Of course I believe you, I was right there with you. Without Tmac those Rockets teams were in the lottery with Yao ****ing Ming so believe me, I really dont care about names over results. Besides, when Yao became anything worth bragging about, Tmac ceased being the player Im speaking of here so its truly irrelevant.


COULD he have been a postseason stud with a larger sample size? Sure. But he didn't. You're dealing in complete hypotheticals hereWell yeah, the entire premise of the thread is hypothetical and based on all my years of studying basketball, its really not much of a stretch, again, Tmac having inferior teammates whilst facing superior competition under significantly harder defensive rules isn't an advantage, that he STILL ups his game in ways few do is all the proof I need, I fail to see how having it easier is suppose to change things, I've been watching basketball too long to fall for that argument brother.


, and you're trying to justify the improvement of a single player for an inferior team beating a superior team in the playoffs.
My argument is actually that the inferior team becomes superior with the addition of a vastly superior player over a choker who wasn't ready.


T-Mac wasn't going to make Noah suddenly not suck in that series.

Tmac would make him better, ever wonder why Noah and Rose never clicked, its because Rose was utterly incapable of playing without the ball, thus much of Noah's offensive value was rendered impotent. With Tmac, you could run many of those flex/horns sets that they did when Rose was injured.


Also, CJ Watson was not good, and inserting him into the lineup does not help Chicago's case.
The point is that hes better than Keith Bogans in this lineup, he would kind of be like what Luther Head was for Tmac those years. Even if you disagree then just keep Keith there IDC.


They were outmatched from a talent standpoint, and it showed. The talent increase from Rose to T-Mac does not fix that. Now, if you had added peak T-Mac to that Chicago squad with Rose still on it, that would be another story. That team more than likely defeats the Heat in that series and goes on to win a title. But that's not what we're debating.

LOL, if you add Tmac then its not even in question IMO. Its only a debate BECAUSE we're swapping Rose out and given how close the series was, I dont see any reason to buy your story.


Close games do not necessarily make a close series. The Rockets' series with the Thunder last season saw games 2-5 decided by a total of 16 points, but I didn't consider it close. Now, would the Bulls have had a better chance to beat the Heat with peak T-Mac instead of peak Rose? Sure. Could they feasibly have done it? OK, I'll buy that, too. But in a hypothetical situation like this, you have to go with the odds. And if that hypothetical Bulls team played that Heat team 100 times, that Miami squad is absolutely winning 51+ games.
Cool, I disagree but good talk. Close games are important and I've never heard of a statistician ignore them entirely as you are attempting.

YAALREADYKNO
07-15-2017, 04:08 PM
1st round exit lol jk but probably lose in the ECF in 6 or 7 games

Chronz
07-15-2017, 08:30 PM
Bulls might lose but Tmac is the best player in the series