# Deng it



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Well, Sam reports:



> The consensus among several players and coaches after the first week of training camp is they’ve never seen Deng playing at such a high level, both shooting the ball well and going effortlessly off the dribble in addition to his fine defense.


Obviously, people are going to have to step up with Derrick out. The last time Deng said he would, he couldn't. Is he wise enough and developed enough to be able to do so this year? Maybe he's the most logical candidate, more so than Boozer or Hamilton. And Kirk's presence will probably reinforce Deng's position as the leader of the team while Derrick is out.

Interesting to see.


----------



## mvP to the Wee (Jul 14, 2007)

Let's see it in a real game first.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Yeah, I'm going to reserve judgment. I didn't love what I saw in the Olympics from him, and I have real concerns over his pain levels in that wrist once he's involved in the day-to-day grind of the league. If true? Great.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

if deng gets the bulls 16 and 7 with good defense thats fine.

after 8 years there are going to be no major changes , just fine tuning.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> if deng gets the bulls 16 and 7 with good defense thats fine.
> 
> after 8 years there are going to be no major changes , just fine tuning.


Well, somebody's going to have to pick up the scoring slack. Deng can do it. But he expends so much energy on defense, he gets tired and can't come through at the end, typically. We'll see what the year brings.

But I agree, we can't expect major changes in his game at this point.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> Well, somebody's going to have to pick up the scoring slack. Deng can do it. But he expends so much energy on defense, he gets tired and can't come through at the end, typically. We'll see what the year brings.
> 
> But I agree, we can't expect major changes in his game at this point.


somebody has to but realistically deng isn't much of a scorer , he's not efficient , nor can he really create for himself or others.

i would rather he double down on defense and space the floor for rip and boozer and probably nate if thibs can get through to him .

i'm not terribly concerned with winning games in a lost season anyway , if the season ended and deng were a better 3 point shooter and nothing else changed i would be fine with that because of its usefulness in future seasons.

the bulls aren't going to be winning many games with their offense this season and i'm thinking this about the best we can expect from deng in the rebounding and defensive departments which he is plenty good with right now.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

At this stage of his career Deng is what he is. I'm not going to be sucked in by another 'player x is having an amazing offseason' article.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> somebody has to but realistically deng isn't much of a scorer , he's not efficient , nor can he really create for himself or others.
> 
> i would rather he double down on defense and space the floor for rip and boozer and probably nate if thibs can get through to him .
> 
> ...


Everything you say is reasonable, but I take issue with Deng's not being a scorer. There was a time when he put up more than 20 a game against Miami in the playoffs. Riley said he couldn't believe Deng could score so much without plays being called for him. I can hope for a bump in his scoring because of Kirk's return, and the possibility of restoring that kind of game while Derrick is out. He's clearly not the option Derrick was, but, beggars can't be choosers.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> Everything you say is reasonable, but I take issue with Deng's not being a scorer. There was a time when he put up more than 20 a game against Miami in the playoffs. Riley said he couldn't believe Deng could score so much without plays being called for him. I can hope for a bump in his scoring because of Kirk's return, and the possibility of restoring that kind of game while Derrick is out. He's clearly not the option Derrick was, but, beggars can't be choosers.


deng is competent for an nba starting small forward scoring the ball.(not especially good nor bad)

he is versatile , he can score in alot of different ways .

he plays hard , he'll get hustle points and hurt a defense for ignoring him.

i'm not saying he cant score .

i am saying you face the law of diminshing returns the more you put on him to score .

not only do you risk increasing his chance of injury and he can be brittle, lowering the effort he can realistically put forth on defense , he's not really all that efficient as it is now something that will in all likelihood go down without rose to take attention away from a guy like deng who is best off the ball.

with increased focus on him , plus all that is expected of him outside of scoring the ball, its just not wise, if he gets more fine , but i certainly wouldn't game plan it that way and with the new point guards not exactly known game management and making players better , it seems to me Thibs would be better off letting Luol be Luol and worry about getting points from other sources.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

From Nazr Mohammad?

Deng's going to have to pick up some of the slack. I don't see any way around it, barring some amazing restoration of Noah's jumper + sky hook. 

But I agree with you, he hasn't held up under the pressure in prior years. Especially because the rest of our shooting looks iffy at best.


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

Honestly, for better or worse, some of the scoring is going to come from Hinrich. Offensive efficiency might be an issue


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Dornado said:


> Honestly, for better or worse, some of the scoring is going to come from Hinrich. Offensive efficiency might be an issue


 Way to step out on a limb there! 

I don't think Kirk'll be our leading scorer. I'm guessing Deng might, but I hope it won't be at 16ppg. 

And yeah, efficiency would be nice....


----------



## Dornado (May 26, 2003)

I'm just saying, from the looks of it, Hinrich is going to be asked to do a lot.... I wouldn't be surprised if he was back to taking 13-14 shots a game like it was 2004-2007.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

I doubt that Chicago management goes for a big shake-up, but if Deng is having a good statistical year and the Bulls are floundering, moving him for cap flexibility and/or a high-upside young player or two may be the best long-term strategy. I don't think Deng's ever going to be good enough to be Rose's sidekick, and if you can either get that guy or clear some space to make amnestying Boozer make sense, it'd be something you have to look long and hard at with Rose not 100% until sometime in the 13-14 season. 

I continue to believe that Chiacgo made a mistake in not trying to build a package for Dwight Howard around Deng and Noah.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Dornado,

agreed. But I still don't think the expectation is that Kirk will be the leading scorer. Carlos just doesn't look up to it, for whatever reason. Deng might. 

I think Bogg is on to something. Let Deng "lead" to an above average record, then trade him for some significant talent more suited to Derrick. Though, to be honest, Deng is really pretty good, and it's hard to see who we might get who might provide what Deng gives...


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

Good Hope said:


> Dornado,
> 
> agreed. But I still don't think the expectation is that Kirk will be the leading scorer. Carlos just doesn't look up to it, for whatever reason. Deng might.
> 
> I think Bogg is on to something. Let Deng "lead" to an above average record, then trade him for some significant talent more suited to Derrick. Though, to be honest, Deng is really pretty good, and it's hard to see who we might get who might provide what Deng gives...


The way I look at it Deng is a good player, but 3rd/4th options aren't irreplaceable.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

He was second option on a championship level team last year. 

I'm not counting on seeing last night's Rip during the season, but maybe he'll surprise us? 

Odds are that Deng will be the leading scorer until Derrick comes back.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Good Hope said:


> ...Odds are that Deng will be the leading scorer until Derrick comes back.


...and we will be loosing every other game. Then after Derrick comes back, Deng will be on injury list for the rest of the season.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> ...and we will be loosing every other game.



Isn't going .500 without Rose a good result?


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Well, Bulls96, my guess is that we go 50-30 this year, assuming Derrick makes it back by end of February, perhaps 43 to 45 wins if he doesn't. I'd say you're about right, just a bit better than 500 without Derrick. 

The Deng is a wuss mantra doesn't hold weight, however.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> Isn't going .500 without Rose a good result?


“Overactive Deng“ historically ends with extended injury.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> “Overactive Deng“ historically ends with extended injury.



First, that's not in any way responsive to the question I posed.

Second, your contention is obviously untrue. I know you've got an agenda (and I don't particularly think Deng is all that), but obviously the "soft" critique, from an injury standpoint, has no merit.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Good Hope said:


> He was second option on a championship level team last year.
> 
> I'm not counting on seeing last night's Rip during the season, but maybe he'll surprise us?
> 
> Odds are that Deng will be the leading scorer until Derrick comes back.


deng was 7th in points per minute and shots per minute on the bulls last season.

the only reason he scored 15 points was that he led the league in minutes.

he was not the 2nd option...the only guy in the starting line up who scored less often was noah.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> First, that's not in any way responsive to the question I posed.
> 
> Second, your contention is obviously untrue. I know you've got an agenda (and I don't particularly think Deng is all that), but obviously the "soft" critique, from an injury standpoint, has no merit.


My respond perfectly matched your question related to my original comment.

*Deng, as well as other our key players, need to be healthy and “ready”, when Derrick
returns. * 

That objective is far more important that team’s standing or Deng’s individual statistics.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> deng was 7th in points per minute and shots per minute on the bulls last season.
> 
> the only reason he scored 15 points was that he led the league in minutes.
> 
> he was not the 2nd option...the only guy in the starting line up who scored less often was noah.


That's a fair distinction. Let's say, he was the second "leader". And yeah, that's the problem with relying on Deng to do so much. He just doesn't have it in him to do the scoring role well when he was so many other burdens. 

The question remains, though. Who will be the scoring leader while Rose is out? 

You could make an argument that it's going to be one of Bulls96's two favorite players, Deng or Boozer. Perhaps Hamilton? Deng will play so many minutes again, especially if Jimmy just doesn't come through, that the odds will be in his favor, even if he isn't the number one scoring option for most of the time he is on the court.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> My respond perfectly matched your question related to my original comment.
> 
> *Deng, as well as other our key players, need to be healthy and “ready”, when Derrick
> returns. *
> ...



It makes no sense to quote me and then post something entirely non-responsive. If you want to have a conversation with yourself, that's fine, but the post as written didn't make any sense in the context of the conversation. 

Anyway, the "soft" critique remains incorrect.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Good Hope said:


> That's a fair distinction. Let's say, he was the second "leader". And yeah, that's the problem with relying on Deng to do so much. He just doesn't have it in him to do the scoring role well when he was so many other burdens.
> 
> The question remains, though. Who will be the scoring leader while Rose is out?
> 
> You could make an argument that it's going to be one of Bulls96's two favorite players, Deng or Boozer. Perhaps Hamilton? Deng will play so many minutes again, especially if Jimmy just doesn't come through, that the odds will be in his favor, even if he isn't the number one scoring option for most of the time he is on the court.



It needs to be Boozer, frankly. I think Boozer/Hamilton/Deng makes the most sense, if the piece on the team perform the roles they should. I'm not terribly confident in that outcome, however.


----------



## Firefight (Jul 2, 2010)

The question shouldn't be who is going to lead the Bulls in ppg while Rose is out. The question should be, who is going to score those points in the final minutes of the 4th quarter. 

We know Boozer can be a good post scorer at times, particularly early in games. Deng can also get hot if he is being aggressive. Nate will be a nice option off the bench to bring in... RIP, Marco, and Kirk also can score at times... But with that said, I have zero confidence in any of these guys to take over a close game in the closing minutes, and that is where Rose will be missed the most. 

Sent from my SGH-T999 using VerticalSports.Com App


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Firefight said:


> The question shouldn't be who is going to lead the Bulls in ppg while Rose is out. The question should be, who is going to score those points in the final minutes of the 4th quarter.
> 
> We know Boozer can be a good post scorer at times, particularly early in games. Deng can also get hot if he is being aggressive. Nate will be a nice option off the bench to bring in... RIP, Marco, and Kirk also can score at times... But with that said, I have zero confidence in any of these guys to take over a close game in the closing minutes, and that is where Rose will be missed the most.
> 
> Sent from my SGH-T999 using VerticalSports.Com App


That's why I think your phrasing of the question is overstated. You're right, there isn't anyone on the roster who can score as reliably in the final minutes of a close game. So, we're going to lose those close games with greater frequency than when Derrick is playing. No question. And your analysis is ostensibly going to be the biggest reason why. 

Nevertheless, I don't foresee us becoming catastrophically bad. In fact, I see us being at least above average (above 500). The question is, who is going to carry the greatest scoring burden on the team that leads them to that kind of performance, and my suggestion is that it will be Deng, for reasons of minutes and reasons of proficiency as a scorer and leader. 

could be Boozer, yeah. That would be great, really. He's a much smoother scorer than Deng. My oldest son told me when we saw the Bulls last season, that Rose and Boozer were the only guys who didn't look awkward moving around. It's just not clear to me that he will come through. If he does, then I look for the Bulls to exceed my 50 win prediction for the year.

Rip is another option. he's looking pretty good right now. And he was the leading scorer on a championship team, albeit at 17ppg. But that was then. Not sure if he can hold up. I'm guessing he'll be out there 2/3rds of the time. Not enough to be scoring leader. Again, if he does come through like the rip of old, then up goes the win total. 

I say the odds are still with Deng as leading scorer this season for the Bulls on a 50 win team (Derrick back by end of Feb).


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Fans get down on Deng because his offense slumps when he is injured. When healthy, Deng is closing in around 18 ppg, 48% shooting, and is pretty automatic from 18 ft and in when open. During injury riddled seasons, he is more in the 15 pgg, 43% shooting, and struggles more with his jumper.

Good Deng is very much a second option, but he is limited in that he relies on others to set him up.

Banged up Deng is probably more a third option.

Lets hope he stays healthy. So far, he has had 4 relatively healthy seasons out of 8.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

A guy whose best-case scenario is 18 ppg, but only if he has the right teammates to set him up, isn't a second option. Ensemble casts have gotten it done in the past, but it's typically much harder that way.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Bogg said:


> A guy whose best-case scenario is 18 ppg, but only if he has the right teammates to set him up, isn't a second option. Ensemble casts have gotten it done in the past, but it's typically much harder that way.


Reggie Miller must have been a terrific third option.

There are so many flaws with your assessment, I don't even know where to start.

I expect Deng to average in the 20-22 ppg range and be the Bulls leading scorer while Rose is out. If that's still third or fourth option basketball to you, then no one will ever change your mind.


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

Rhyder said:


> Reggie Miller must have been a terrific third option.
> 
> There are so many flaws with your assessment, I don't even know where to start.
> 
> I expect Deng to average in the 20-22 ppg range and be the Bulls leading scorer while Rose is out. If that's still third or fourth option basketball to you, then no one will ever change your mind.


An entire career of showing us he's not a second option isn't enough for you? Deng can't dribble a basketball, he relies on open jumpers and teammates setting him up. That's third option at best.


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

garnett said:


> An entire career of showing us he's not a second option isn't enough for you? Deng can't dribble a basketball, he relies on open jumpers and teammates setting him up. That's third option at best.


I'm still failing to see how handles = second option. Poor Karl Malone, David Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Glen Rice, Ray Allen, etc...

NBA fan base must have gone MJ-lite perimeter scoring crazy. Garnett isn't a second option either by your definition.

Deng isn't a world beater, but he is definitely the second option on this team. First option with Rose out unless Boozer somehow revitalizes himself.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

You go, Rhyder!

Night in, night out, Deng is pretty damn consistent. Boozer or Hamilton might have a better night from time to time, but without DRose, you count on Deng and then hope for one or two others to step up.


----------



## Bogg (May 4, 2009)

Rhyder said:


> Reggie Miller must have been a terrific third option.


Reggie was scoring 18 a game on ensemble casts that were trying to win a title. Reggie's also overrated. Deng's going to be on a team that'd consider .500 basketball a huge success. Ben Gordon's put up 20 a game for playoff squads, but nobody intends to build a championship squad with him as the sidekick. 




Rhyder said:


> I expect Deng to average in the 20-22 ppg range and be the Bulls leading scorer while Rose is out. If that's still third or fourth option basketball to you, then no one will ever change your mind.


For Deng to average that kind of point production, he's going to see a drop-off in the quality of his defense and rebounding, and the Bulls offense is unlikely to be all that efficient. That's Paul Pierce-type production, and Deng's nowhere near the offensive talent that a younger Paul Pierce was. 



Rhyder said:


> I'm still failing to see how handles = second option. Poor Karl Malone, David Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Glen Rice, Ray Allen, etc...


Yes, well, if Deng had an all-time post up game or was one of the best shooters ever, we wouldn't be having this discussion, would we? You don't have to be a fantastic ball-handler to get your own offense, but the problem is that Deng's got a good all-around offensive game without doing any one thing particularly well. He's an elite utility guy, not an elite scorer.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> I'm still failing to see how handles = second option. Poor Karl Malone, David Robinson, Shaq, Hakeem, Kareem, Glen Rice, Ray Allen, etc...
> 
> NBA fan base must have gone MJ-lite perimeter scoring crazy. Garnett isn't a second option either by your definition.
> 
> Deng isn't a world beater, but he is definitely the second option on this team. First option with Rose out unless Boozer somehow revitalizes himself.


truthfully anyone can be a 2nd option, if a team chose to feature them, virtually all nba players were at one point star college scorers , but deng would not be a good 2nd option .

when you look at the teams that made the playoffs its hard to find a 1st or 2nd option scorer who is equal or less prolific at scoring than deng, he scored 14.0 per 36 minutes last season.

the pacers alone had 7 players scoring at a higher rate , the bulls had 6

out of the trio of boozer rip and nate , none have ever scored at such a low rate at any point in their careers( a combined 30 seasons).

add to that deng is not especially efficient, he doesn't draw alot of fouls,he is not good at creating for himself, nor is he good at creating offense for others , its fitting a square peg in a round hole.

he is a good scorer , but there is just no way its realistic to assume he can handle that kind of burden, and even if he could it would be counter productive because his versatility as well as his defense are his prime assets , both would suffer if he were trying to avg. 22 a game, as would the team .


----------



## Rhyder (Jul 15, 2002)

Da Grinch said:


> truthfully anyone can be a 2nd option, if a team chose to feature them, virtually all nba players were at one point star college scorers , but deng would not be a good 2nd option .
> 
> when you look at the teams that made the playoffs its hard to find a 1st or 2nd option scorer who is equal or less prolific at scoring than deng, he scored 14.0 per 36 minutes last season.
> 
> ...


Deng would be a great third option on a Heat, Thunder, LA Lakers, and am not trying argue him that or wouldn't mind an upgrade on the offensive end. I'm arguing that Deng can and is good enough to be an adequate second option on a team that can still compete for a championship.

I would love to make Deng a third option on this team through draft or trade. But until that happens, he can definately fill the role.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Rhyder said:


> Deng would be a great third option on a Heat, Thunder, LA Lakers, and am not trying argue him that or wouldn't mind an upgrade on the offensive end. I'm arguing that Deng can and is good enough to be an adequate second option on a team that can still compete for a championship.
> 
> I would love to make Deng a third option on this team through draft or trade. But until that happens, he can definately fill the role.


the 2nd options on those teams are wade, westbrook and dwight howard 

the 3rd options are kevin martin, chris bosh and pau gasol.

if they replaced any of those 6 players with deng it would be a major downgrade on the offensive end.

the really good offensive teams have their top players who make others more efficient or are very efficient themselves and sometimes both , 

deng is neither so he wouldn't be a featured offensive player for any of those 3 teams, as much hate as boozer gets on this board he is the only one outside of rose who would be a featured offensive player on any of those teams.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Deng and Boozer combine ($13,326,700+$15,000,000) are making 40% of team’s salary and next season it will close to 50% … that is ridiculous. 

Their top market price is less than $16M


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

This didn't deserve its own thread in my eyes, so here:


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

King Joseus said:


> This didn't deserve its own thread in my eyes, so here:


the big question here is did Sir Paul have any idea who these guys were?


----------

