# Up to Deng to emerge as second option



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

> Deng is being paid like the type of player who can help take over games when needed, and take some pressure off Rose in the process, but he didn't perform as well in the clutch on Wednesday night. In eight minutes down the stretch, Deng managed just two shots and missed both. He has never been the type of player who can create on his own, and it's hard to pin any specific blame on him when the entire offense looked lethargic at the end. But Deng has been around the game and the team long enough to know what to do in these situations. He has the ability to knock down a crucial jumper, but he hasn't always shown the desire to do so.Deng finished with just 13 points on Wednesday night on 5-for-13 shooting. While I still think he will have a solid year this season in Thibodeau's system, his ability to slash and cut his way to 20 points is needed more than ever with Boozer on the bench. If he can't fill the role of a consistent second offensive weapon to go alongside Rose then the Bulls are going to find themselves in the same place they did against the Thunder and every other good team they face in the first month without Boozer.


http://espn.go.com/blog/chicago/bulls/post/_/id/2017/up-to-deng-to-emerge-as-second-option


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Hes never been that player, hes just not the type of player who can take over a game. He cant create for himself, he cant dribble, hes a solid player but we cant count on him to be a second option.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

Agreed.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

All these comments are like music to my ears 

As I have mentioned before, Deng and his 
contract is the biggest Bulls problem.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

That is just not feasible! Deng has proved he can't be the legit 2nd option. 3rd is possible, but 2nd is not! If you watch a lot of Bulls games (regardless of opponent) like I do, you will have noticed that Deng works harder and does better against teams that don't have good SFs. Just look at the Pacer game without Granger. This is a way for Deng to inflate his numbers where his stats look like he is better than he is. I believe he can be effective in the right offense and maybe Deng will perform a lot better when Boozer gets back and less attention is on him. However, he is too inconsistent if we want to be championship contenders. Coach Thibs said he wasn't used correctly with Vinny, but I havent seen big enough strides to justify keeping him. 2nd option? I think not!


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Deng's had a rough 2 games. He will bounce back, it's a long season. Plus once we get Boozer back Deng will be the third option anyways.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

I'm confident that Lu will bounce back. Right now, the system is not strong enough to withstand real game pressure. That will come. Thibo is no dummy.

But, there is no denying how important it is for James Johnson to establish himself as a competent backup. We need him to take the pressure off Lu, both physically and mentally, so that he can get his game going. We need him (Lu, that is) badly.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Cogitations poenam nemo patitur :

•Deng will bounce back (after resting three months)…
•Deng waits when system will be strong enough to withstand the real pressure
•Bull’s players need to understand and follow Deng’s instincts
•Deng just finish developing a three more trajectories of his moves and soon after successful piloting Bulls will utilize them in timely fashion.

I am sure at some meaningless point, during the next 80 games, particular against the “best“ NBA teams, we may see Deng working on his statistics, as a typical fourth option...collecting $150,000 per game


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Well that was a quick bounce back. 40 points. He carried us tonight.

So now he is averaging 21 ppg on 50% shooting. Not to shabby.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

Lu, I knew you could do it!


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Hes never been that player, hes just not the type of player who can take over a game.


The very next game he takes over. Wanna retract this statement?


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

...it was all because of Rose (an entire Blazers team was just chasing Rose, making everyone else wide open)

Thanks God, finally we have a Superstar .


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> ...it was all because of Rose (an entire Blazers team was just chasing Rose, making everyone else wide open)
> 
> Thanks God, finally we have a Superstar .


come on. You can't give Deng any credit for dropping 40 on the Blazers?

We are all bulls fans here. Rejoice in Deng carrying us to a victory and give the man some credit.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Definitely happy with this win. Blazers are a tough team, so winning this one is terrific.


----------



## Fergus (Oct 2, 2002)

Deng played an outstanding offensive game tonight. The fact that the Blazers were focussing on Rose helped, but Deng still made the plays. Scoring 40 points was noteworthy. It seemed like Deng came into the game more confident in his shot and more determined that I have seem him recently.

This was very nice to see. I am glad Deng finally had a good game. Hopefully this will help his confidence and he will continue to push his offensive game.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> come on. You can't give Deng any credit for dropping 40 on the Blazers?
> 
> We are all bulls fans here. Rejoice in Deng carrying us to a victory and give the man some credit.


You are correct ...40 points is quite an achievement and Deng did something special tonight. I am happy for him, he is a good man and deserves some credits.

Hopefully, it will help Bulls with trade.

But today, I am very exciting about Mr. Franchise...imo, he is turning the corner !


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> You are correct ...40 points is quite an achievement and Deng did something special tonight. I am happy for him, he is a good man and deserves some credits.
> 
> Hopefully, it will help Bulls with trade.
> 
> But today, I am very exciting about Mr. Franchise...imo, he is turning the corner !


Thats what I'm talking about!


----------



## ScottVdub (Jul 9, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> ...it was all because of Rose (an entire Blazers team was just chasing Rose, making everyone else wide open)
> 
> Thanks God, finally we have a Superstar .


I agree with this. Deng did play great though. But Portland was worrying about Rose way too much. Our offense looks good when the other teams puts too much attention in stopping Rose, because he picked the D apart tonight. They left Deng open the whole game. When teams guard everyone else and force Rose to be the only option, that is when the Bulls offense looks like trash. Plus the Blazers spent too much time whining and complaining instead of playing basketball, so the Bulls got the fastbreak going early and often.

Good game for Deng though, I don't expect 40 all the time but if they are going to leave him open like that, then he will do alot of good to keep nailing those shots.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> The very next game he takes over. Wanna retract this statement?


No, last time I checked it was Rose who was creating open looks for Deng, heck I can argue that the Blazers odd defense of putting 2 men on Rose at all times while leaving Deng open had more to do with Deng's great game than anything else. 

Deng had a great game no one is going to take that away from him but no way in hell do I ever trust him to be a consistent offensive weapon, hes just not.


----------



## someone (Jul 17, 2007)

Melo who?!


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> No, last time I checked it was Rose who was creating open looks for Deng, heck I can argue that the Blazers odd defense of putting 2 men on Rose at all times while leaving Deng open had more to do with Deng's great game than anything else.
> 
> Deng had a great game no one is going to take that away from him but no way in hell do I ever trust him to be a consistent offensive weapon, hes just not.


Sigh.

Don't be biased. I am pretty sure 12 of Deng's 40 came in the hand full of minutes that Rose wasn't even on the court with Deng. 

Deng moved very well tonight, knocked down J's including threes, slashed, and got out on the fast break. He played good D as always. Pretty much exactly what we want him to do. And exactly the type of player you want playing alongside Rose especially when Boozer comes back. Why is that so hard to see?

How come when Deng drops 40 it is all because of Rose and yet when Deng averages 11 over the first 2 games it has nothing to do with Rose?

Why is it so hard to give Deng the credit he deserves?


----------



## easy (Mar 28, 2005)

I just hope Deng keeps playing like this. 
Obviously we cannot expect him having 40 point nights often, but its good to have somebody reliable that doesn't even need plays drawn for him and doesn't destroy the flow of offense. Simply put if teams double team Rose, Rose has the option of passing to an efficient scoring player, like Deng is. Also don't forget the defense Deng plays. 20 ppg with good efficiency and good defense night in and night out seams reasonable for Deng.

One more thing. 
I find a lot of similarities between Rondo and Deng, in both players role in their teams. Rondo plays with Allen, Pierce and KG, players that require constant attention and double teams from every team on offense and defense. So Rondo has the opportunity to pass the ball to 3 efficient scorers, crash the boards when teams block out the taller players and also gamble on defense, because he know that he has elite defenders backing him up. Rondo has the talent and the IQ so he uses all the opportunities he gets and now he is recognized as one of the top playmakers. 
I can see Deng having similar impact with Rondo for the Bulls and I think we just had a glimpse last night. We will see how things develop when Boozer comes back.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> Sigh.
> 
> Don't be biased. I am pretty sure 12 of Deng's 40 came in the hand full of minutes that Rose wasn't even on the court with Deng.
> 
> ...


BECAUSE ROSE IS THE REASON HE SCORED 40 lol. 

JESUS, nobody is saying Deng sucks, nobody is saying that Deng had a lucky game. I gave him credit for having a great game but that does not change my opinion that he is not a player who will be able to carry a team on his back. Deng is what he is, I don't know what you saw last night that makes him a different player. 

I have always said hes a spot shooter and occasional slasher, he was able to hit wide open shots at at a career clip, the result was he scored 40 points. Does that mean hes going to do it every night, no.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

easy said:


> One more thing.
> I find a lot of similarities between Rondo and Deng, in both players role in their teams. Rondo plays with Allen, Pierce and KG, players that require constant attention and double teams from every team on offense and defense. So Rondo has the opportunity to pass the ball to 3 efficient scorers, crash the boards when teams block out the taller players and also gamble on defense, because he know that he has elite defenders backing him up. Rondo has the talent and the IQ so he uses all the opportunities he gets and now he is recognized as one of the top playmakers.
> I can see Deng having similar impact with Rondo for the Bulls and I think we just had a glimpse last night. We will see how things develop when Boozer comes back.


Two totally different type of players.

Rondo is a dangerous player on the fast break even with a defender with him stride by stride, Deng is not.

Deng is a dangerous shooter when left open, Rondo is not.

Rondo is a better defender than Deng, not saying Deng is bad but Rondo is top 10. 

Rondo's ball handling abilities is superior to Deng's. 

Deng is tall and active on the boards while Rondo takes advantage of not being guarded to his advantage by sneaking into those rebounding spots. 

If anything Deng reminds me more of a better shooting not as good defending AK47 or Tayshaun Prince.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> ...that does not change my opinion that he is not a player who will be able to carry a team on his back...


He never talked about his back, just only shoulders.
Please be accurate next time...Deng talked only 
about shoulders and demanded $72M in cash for 6 years 
for ride ($150K per game) ! 

“This brings a lot of responsibilities,” Deng said. “Those are responsibilities I’m looking forward to, on and off the court. I take basketball very seriously and I look forward to putting the team on my *shoulders*.”

E-rob, Jalen, Benedict, Deng - what do they have in common ?


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> He never talked about back, just only shoulders.
> Please be accurate next time...Deng talked only
> about shoulders and $72M in cash
> 
> ...


:laugh:


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> He never talked about back, just only shoulders.
> Please be accurate next time...Deng talked only
> about shoulders and $72M in cash
> 
> ...


My bad.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> BECAUSE ROSE IS THE REASON HE SCORED 40 lol. .


Come on. Nobody is ever the "reason someone else scores *40*". Especcially when your knocking down long range j's and also scoring in pretty much every way throughout the game.

But the best part about this is that: DENG SCORED AT BASICALLY THE SAME RATE WHEN ROSE WAS OFF THE COURT.

Amazing for Rose to be the only reason Deng scored 40 When 12 of those came in approximateley the 8 minutes Rose was on the bench and Deng was in.





> JESUS, nobody is saying Deng sucks, nobody is saying that Deng had a lucky game. I gave him credit for having a great game


You gave him a back-handed compliment. You said he had a great game _but_ it was all because of Rose.


> but that does not change my opinion that he is not a player who will be able to carry a team on his back. Deng is what he is, I don't know what you saw last night that makes him a different player.



I saw nothing that makes him a different player. He is just a very good off the ball scorer one of the better ones in th NBA. And when you have a pg that dominates the ball and your about to have a pf that needs the ball. It's a great fit to have a wing that plays D, Rebounds, hits threes, and can score in the high teens without ever really needing to hold onto the ball for an extended period of time.



> I have always said hes a spot shooter and occasional slasher, he was able to hit wide open shots at at a career clip, the result was he scored 40 points. Does that mean hes going to do it every night, no


To call his shots wide open is a bit of a stretch and another attempt at knocking him. But since we have a great pg that can create for others, don't we want a wing that can slash, defend, rebound, and be a spot up shooter???

Of course he's not going to score 40 a night, he's not the greatest scorer of all time, but you said he couldn't take over a game. The very next game he took over the game. I pointed it out. That's all. What you didn't think youd be called out for your comment?


----------



## easy (Mar 28, 2005)

thebizkit69u said:


> Two totally different type of players.


I am not saying they are similar as players or talents. Im saying that, when Boozer comes back, Deng hopefully will have the same impact as Rondo has for the Celts. Basically Rose and Boozer will be the primary offensive players and the two players that teams pay more attention to. That will leave Deng alone or guarded by a lesser defender, thus allowing him to exploit the opposing defense without harming the Bulls offense. If he can do that efficiently we will be a very dangerous team and basically thats the similarity I see in Rondo and Deng


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> Come on. Nobody is ever the "reason someone else scores *40*". Especcially when your knocking down long range j's and also scoring in pretty much every way throughout the game.


No way Deng scores 40 with Rose not on the court. Granted I'm exaggerating when I say that Rose is the sole reason for Deng scoring 40, but Portland's defense on Rose lead to MANY open looks for Deng and others. 



> But the best part about this is that: DENG SCORED AT BASICALLY THE SAME RATE WHEN ROSE WAS OFF THE COURT.


Do you really think if Rose did not play the game Deng would have still scored 40 points? LOL. If Portland would have doubled Deng instead of Rose he would have been shut down. 4 rebounds and 1 ast for Deng, he was pretty much just sinking shots from the corners created by Rose. 



> You gave him a back-handed compliment. You said he had a great game _but_ it was all because of Rose.


A compliment is a compliment, the truth is Deng would not have scored 40 without Rose, I dont see how that can be called an insult when its the truth. 




> To call his shots wide open is a bit of a stretch and another attempt at knocking him. But since we have a great pg that can create for others, don't we want a wing that can slash, defend, rebound, and be a spot up shooter???


Again I don't see the knock, he was wide open on the majority of his shots, not an insult just the truth. 



> Of course he's not going to score 40 a night, he's not the greatest scorer of all time, but you said he couldn't take over a game. The very next game he took over the game. I pointed it out. That's all. What you didn't think youd be called out for your comment?


We have very different definitions for taking over a game, IMO a person who takes over a game is someone who scores even when double teamed, someone who just cant be shut down. Deng was the second option even with his high scoring output, the opposing team still had 2 men on Rose all game long. 

I just think you are looking for people to bow down at the Deng altar because he had a good game. Hes an average player, he really IMO did not take over the game but I give him credit for having a very good game. I don't need to gush over him like you do.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

easy said:


> I am not saying they are similar as players or talents. Im saying that, when Boozer comes back, Deng hopefully will have the same impact as Rondo has for the Celts. Basically Rose and Boozer will be the primary offensive players and the two players that teams pay more attention to. That will leave Deng alone or guarded by a lesser defender, thus allowing him to exploit the opposing defense without harming the Bulls offense. If he can do that efficiently we will be a very dangerous team and basically thats the similarity I see in Rondo and Deng


Deng is not a good play-maker so again I just don't see a similar impact. IMO Deng fits more of the Ray Allen role, someone who keeps coming off screens and hits the open shots, obviously hes no Ray Allen in terms of that great jump shot but the role can be similar. Kirk Hinrich probably would have fit the Rondo role as a defender,rebounder and play maker but Rose is primary ballhandler so its difficult to make that comparison.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Youv'e already lost the arguement by showing ridiculous bias. It really doesn't matter what actually happens because you and others in your camp will always minimize his positives and exaggerate his weaknesses. 

This is just a perfect example of how much you will try and bend what actually happenned in order to suit your belief that Deng is an "average player". So I think my point has already been made.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> Youv'e already lost the arguement by showing ridiculous bias. It really doesn't matter what actually happens because you and others in your camp will always minimize his positives and exaggerate his weaknesses.
> 
> This is just a perfect example of how much you will try and bend what actually happenned in order to suit your belief that Deng is an "average player". So I think my point has already been made.


I don't know why you have to turn every Luol Deng topic into a personal mission to defend him in every way. Just enjoy watching him play and forget about what everyone else thinks of him.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

easy said:


> ...If he can do that efficiently we will be a very dangerous team and basically thats the similarity I see in Rondo and Deng


IMO, they are fundamentally different. 

Rondo has “balls” and he is short...Deng exhibits the characteristics of trepidation and he is tall.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I don't know why you have to turn every Luol Deng topic into a personal mission to defend him in every way. Just enjoy watching him play and forget about what everyone else thinks of him.


It's an arguement that has been going on for a long time. There is a contingent of bulls fans like yourself who have constantly downplayed the importance of Deng on this team. You guy's take little shots at him whenever the opportunity arrises.

I am on the other side I value his importance to the team. I think having an excellent off the ball scorer, that can hit threes, mid-range j's, slash, finish on the fast break, PLAY D, and REBOUND. Is very important to our team. And extremeley hard to replace.

So when 2 games into the season and you guys are already bashing him, but then in the third game he drops 40 and carries us to a victory. You better believe that I am going to point this out.

Deng is averaging 21 ppg and you don't think he can be a second option (even though he was one of the top scoring second options last year). 

It's a luxury that Deng will soon be our third option. Our team is loaded and deng fits in perfect.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

Deng had a good game the other night but it doesn't change the fact that he's an average player. The Bulls would be in real trouble with depending on him as the second option on a nightly basis; he's a fine third option though.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> It's an arguement that has been going on for a long time. There is a contingent of bulls fans like yourself who have constantly downplayed the importance of Deng on this team. You guy's take little shots at him whenever the opportunity arrises.


Dude its not just Bulls fan's, the national media really doesn't think much of Deng either, Barkley even called him Luol Dog and hes not even a Bulls fan.



> I am on the other side I value his importance to the team. I think having an excellent off the ball scorer, that can hit threes, mid-range j's, slash, finish on the fast break, PLAY D, and REBOUND. Is very important to our team. And extremeley hard to replace.


Yet the Bulls look to replace him every year. You would think that such a rare and talented player like Deng would be highly desirable by almost every team in the NBA, but the truth is most teams view him as an average SF.



> So when 2 games into the season and you guys are already bashing him, but then in the third game he drops 40 and carries us to a victory. You better believe that I am going to point this out.


I cant speak for everyone just myself, I did not bash him the first two games, I said his shooting would come back but that it still doesn't change my opinion of what he can and cant do on the court.



> Deng is averaging 21 ppg and you don't think he can be a second option (even though he was one of the top scoring second options last year).


No I dont think he can be a second option on a championship caliber team, nor do I think he can carry a team by himself like Rose can.



> It's a luxury that Deng will soon be our third option. Our team is loaded and deng fits in perfect.


A very expensive 3rd option.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

VanillaPrice said:


> Deng had a good game the other night but it doesn't change the fact that he's an average player. The Bulls would be in real trouble with depending on him as the second option on a nightly basis; he's a fine third option though.


what is your definition of average player?

Do you mean average starter? And if so are you aware of what caliber the average starting sf is in the NBA?

Or do you just mean average like in the literal term where he would be about the 6th or 7th best player on a middle of the road team?


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> what is your definition of average player?
> 
> Do you mean average starter? And if so are you aware of what caliber the average starting sf is in the NBA?
> 
> Or do you just mean average like in the literal term where he would be about the 6th or 7th best player on a middle of the road team?


Average starter on a solid to good team.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Dude its not just Bulls fan's, the national media really doesn't think much of Deng either, Barkley even called him Luol Dog and hes not even a Bulls fan.
> .


I don't really care what you think the national media thinks or if they do in fact think Deng is average. 

I value him and have tried to express why I value him numerous times. Deng has done nothing but consistently prove me correct. The stats prove me correct. Basically your arguement has no foundation. Other than citing other peoples opinions.






> Yet the Bulls look to replace him every year. You would think that such a rare and talented player like Deng would be highly desirable by almost every team in the NBA, but the truth is most teams view him as an average SF.


We have gone over this before. But being mentioned in trade rumors does not mean the bulls really are trying to get rid of him. They are rumors. Remember when Noah was in a bunch of rumors and then we promptly resigned him? Plus getting mentioned in rumors for guys like Kobe, Boozer, Gasol, Melo. Does not exactly make you dog meat.



> I cant speak for everyone just myself, I did not bash him the first two games, I said his shooting would come back but that it still doesn't change my opinion of what he can and cant do on the court.


Funny thing is nothing will change your opinion of what he can do on the court. Last year he was one of the highest scoring 2nd options in the NBA. Yet you say he can't be a second scoring option. In fact he is one of the highest scoring second options again this year.

So you have been proved wrong but it doesn't matter your not interested in facts.



> No I dont think he can be a second option on a championship caliber team, nor do I think he can carry a team by himself like Rose can.


Nor is he asked to. Why would Deng be expected to carry the team by himself? He is the _second_ scoring option (and only briefly until Boozer gets back). Rose's job is to carry the team. Why confuse that? And why pretend like he is our long-term second scoring option? Ever hear of Boozer?




> A very expensive 3rd option


I think you need to look around the league and see what championship teams pay their third highest paid player.

Ill do it for you.

Lakers:
1.)Kobe 24.8
2.)Gasol 17.8
3.)Bynum: 13.8 mil
4.)Odom 8.2
Boston: 
1.)Garnett 18.8
2.)Pierce 13.9
3.)Allen 10 mil
4.)Rondo 9 mil
Orlando:
1.)Lewis 20.5
2.)Carter 17.3
3.)Howard 16.5 mil
4.)Reddick 7.5
Miami:
1.)Lebron 14.5
2.)Bosh 14.5
3.)Wade 14 mil
4.)Miller 5
Chicago:
Deng 11.4

So there you go preseason top 5 favorite teams to win the NBA championship and what they pay their top 4 highest paid players. (for us i just put Deng)

So I guess on a championship team we really wouldn't be paying so much money for our third option...


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

VanillaPrice said:


> Average starter on a solid to good team.


can you please list some examples of similar players?

I just want to get an idea of what an average starting sf looks like in your opinion.

Do they play very good D and average 18 and 7?


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Casey, you are so right in some cases and sometimes terribly wrong.

Yes, a significant group of fans like...*thebizkit69u* just hate Deng for unknown reason :angel:

Several years ago I decided to lead that “herd” in “Get Rid of Deng” club, in order to avoid violence. And now I am so addicted with above mentioned feelings that I need to stay on medication until Pax will trade that fellow...sorry thebizkit69u, but it is all your fault 

Here where you are extremely wrong :

//Deng is very important to our team and extremely hard to replace //

Salmons for example, successfully replaced Deng (above and beyond) two years ago by averaging something around 20 points and having a monster impact in every game…Bucks bought him for $8M/year .

//…the top scoring second options last year…//

Majority of his career Deng was the third option (career average 16 ppg) : 

•Ranks #42 in the NBA in Field-Goal Percentage
•Ranks #48 in the NBA in Field Goals Per 48 Minutes

He is an average NBA player and it is so obvious ! 

//...Our team is loaded and deng fits in perfect //

Are you kidding yourself or what...poor Rose is ready to die from exhaustion and you are saying we are loaded ?! With Boozer we have only two players, who can create something, the rest of the gang just a straight forward role players, including Deng.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

I don't want to turn this into an extremeley long thread about Deng. We have done it multiple times and I can see it going down that path again.

I will just leave it at this: The stats speak for themselves. Which is quite surprising when one considers that Deng is a defensive player first. Defensive players tend to not be good stat guys but Deng is. And the other important non stat part of Deng is how good his "fit" is.

I mean when you have a dynamic pg like Rose don't you want to surround him with shooters? Don't you want to surround him with slashers and guys that can get out on the fast break with him?

And more importantly don't you want said players to also rebound and play D?

Deng provides all of these things and has the stats to back it up.

So you guys can continue to argue in ignorance and I will take comfort in knowing that not only is he the perfect fit but he also has all the tangible numbers to back up my side of the arguement. I am simply on the side of logic and arguing with people who give vague descriptions based on unfounded opinions and a poor knowledge of team building.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> can you please list some examples of similar players?
> 
> I just want to get an idea of what an average starting sf looks like in your opinion.
> 
> Do they play very good D and average 18 and 7?


He's also a terrible playmaker and isn't particuraly good at creating his own shot. Look, he's not a bad player. I said he was an average starter on a good team ala Artest/Rashard Lewis/John Salmons types. Quit being so defensive.


----------



## Deep Sound Channel (Apr 28, 2010)

Anyone who thinks that Deng has more value to us as a trading chip is out of their mind, frankly. That has far more to do with his history of injury than his on-court performance. No, creating his own shot is not one of Deng's strengths, but given that he does just about everything else above average for his position and is naturally a stylistic compliment to a drive and kick player like Rose, he's well worth what we pay him. I'm still glad we didn't trade him for old man Garnett- how many 25 year old SF's are in the league today who can do what Deng does?

His main weakness is that the more you lean on him for points, the more he folds mentally- he's just not that type of ballplayer. He needs to be able to pick his shots in the flow of the game in order to be ideally effective- that's partly why he's able to shoot such a high percentage. One thing I will guarantee you is this- Deng's value in a quality offense with 2 other go-to scorers will be *far greater* than it was in the offensive schemes we've been seeing these past few years. If he plays anywhere near the way he did in 06-07, it is absolutely within our reach to play in the conference finals.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

VanillaPrice said:


> He's also a terrible playmaker and isn't particuraly good at creating his own shot. Look, he's not a bad player. I said he was an average starter on a good team ala Artest/Rashard Lewis/John Salmons types. Quit being so defensive.


Ill respond to you because I asked you a question and you answered it. 

Deng averaged last year 17.6 ppg and 7.3 rpg


Artest averaged last year 8.3 ppg and 4.5 rpg
Salmons is a 2g that averaged (on the bulls) last year 12.7 ppg and 2.5 rpg
Lewis is 4 that averaged last year 14.1 ppg and 4.5 rpg



But thanks for proving my point...


----------



## garnett (May 13, 2003)

Deng really needs to work on his dribbling. Any more than two dribbles and it's usually a turnover. It's nice that almost all of his points come in the flow of the offense but if he could create his own shot he'd be a much better player.


----------



## Luke (Dec 7, 2008)

caseyrh said:


> Ill respond to you because I asked you a question and you answered it.
> 
> Deng averaged last year 17.6 ppg and 7.3 rpg
> 
> ...


Artest put up similar numbers when he had a similar role to Deng, while being better defensively. Let's not pretend like Deng could put up 18/7 on the Lakers.

And once Salmons was traded from Chicago he put up 20/3/3 on the Bucks, pretty convinient that you left that out, though.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Yes Casey, abhorrence is a horrible thing and all our uncorroborated opinions are very much disgusting...but make us feel goooooooood !

Yep again , a team building is unknown territory to me, but I (like majority of basketball fans) can distinct a good one from bad. 

Just don’t get upset with us…okay , we like your enthusiasm and sense of loyalty to particular player…peace brother


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

VanillaPrice said:


> Artest put up similar numbers when he had a similar role to Deng, while being better defensively. Let's not pretend like Deng could put up 18/7 on the Lakers.
> 
> And once Salmons was traded from Chicago he put up 20/3/3 on the Bucks, pretty convinient that you left that out, though.


Salmons excels at putting up good numbers when he moves to a new team and then moving back down to mediocrity once he's been there for a bit. He put up similarly great numbers on the Bulls after they originally traded for him. To look at the numbers he put up after going to the Bucks is not looking at an accurate representation of John Salmons as an NBA player.

I like Salmons, but he's not shown that he can play a full season as well as he's capable of doing.

EDIT: Or, rather, after looking again, that he's capable of consistently being at that level. He had one season where he was consistently good. We'll see what happens this year now that he got paid.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> IMO, they are fundamentally different.
> 
> Rondo has “balls” and he is short...Deng exhibits the characteristics of trepidation and he is tall.



This reminded me of the hilarious time Scottie Pippen was doing color analysis of a Bulls game and said "Luol Deng has big balls." Fantastic.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> •Ranks #42 in the NBA in Field-Goal Percentage
> •Ranks #48 in the NBA in Field Goals Per 48 Minutes
> 
> He is an average NBA player and it is so obvious !


You understand your cited stats actually completely defeat your own argument, right?

Just counting the 12 active players per NBA roster, that is 360 players in the league. 

Your stats indicate Deng is in the top 11.6% in the NBA in field goal percentage and the top 13.3% in field goals per 48 minutes.

You have a curious definition of "average."


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> You understand your cited stats actually completely defeat your own argument, right?
> 
> Just counting the 12 active players per NBA roster, that is 360 players in the league.
> 
> ...


Saw that too. Figured I was better off not even touching it.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

5-13 shooting 5 to's 1 ast, yet another mediocre game when we needed him the most. Again he is not a consistent #2 option, he is just average. 

Damn I should not have said average, Casey's Dengy senses are tingling.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

Average has its own definition. It does not fit Deng.

I'm not arguing that you're wrong here about Deng's performance tonight, but the continued insistence that he's "average" is not accurate. He's not perfect by any means, but he's certainly better than average.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> 5-13 shooting 5 to's 1 ast, yet another mediocre game when we needed him the most. Again he is not a consistent #2 option, he is just average.
> 
> Damn I should not have said average, Casey's Dengy senses are tingling.


What you don't understand is that this is the ups and downs of being a second scoring option in the NBA. He's going to have his games when he shoots less than 50%. He's going to have some games with mediocre stats it's just the nature of the game. But you have to look at a much larger sample size to judge him. At least point to a 5 or 10 game trend.

All that being said if we just look at scoring:

17 points on 13 shots is pretty good. 

But this just shows the amount of bias you have. It's almost like you are looking for the opportunity to jump all over Deng.

I wonder if you were to look up a guy like Ray Allen how many nights he would have when his scoring is below what you consider acceptable for a second option?

Maybe Ray Allen's average too? He certainly doesn't play D or Rebound as good as Deng.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> 17 points on 13 shots is pretty good.


I like how you dont mention that he shot 5-13, or how he was an instant turnover whenever he tried to drive to the basket and that he cant score when double teamed. 

LOL and you call me biased.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I like how you dont mention that he shot 5-13, or how he was an instant turnover whenever he tried to drive to the basket and that he cant score when double teamed.
> 
> LOL and you call me biased.



5 for 13 is pretty bad, but the point was that if you're getting trips to the line or making some threes, it can help offset that poor percentage to a degree.

Also, it's just as dumb to act like one 5 for 13 night proves Deng is a bad player as it would be to say that one 40 point night proves he is a superstar. A season is not made in one game.

One other thing: Why do we want Deng to emerge as a 2nd option? It seems that he should be the clear third option on the team once Boozer is back.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> 5 for 13 is pretty bad, but the point was that if you're getting trips to the line or making some threes, it can help offset that poor percentage to a degree.
> 
> Also, it's just as dumb to act like one 5 for 13 night proves Deng is a bad player as it would be to say that one 40 point night proves he is a superstar. A season is not made in one game.
> 
> One other thing: Why do we want Deng to emerge as a 2nd option? It seems that he should be the clear third option on the team once Boozer is back.


I never said Deng had a bad game, I said he had an average game. Heck I never even said Deng was a bad player just an average one and yet that still pisses off Casey. 

Also, I actually think saying he had an average game is probably giving him too much credit, the guy could not drive to the basket to save his life, did not really rebound and he got lit up by Gallinary. 

The whole Deng as a second option talk revolves around the need for him to be a second option because Boozer is out. Obviously he will go back to being a 3rd 4th option once Boozer is back.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> You understand your cited stats actually completely defeat your own argument, right?
> 
> Just counting the 12 active players per NBA roster, that is 360 players in the league.
> 
> ...


My arguments are perfectly in line with official Deng's statistic...just count at least the six active players per roster (you should be counting five, technically speaking) and that will bring a peace to your priceless mind.

I found out that you have a very specific logic: 

for example, you did argue with me that we are GOOD at center position and then refused to accept the bet that theoretically gives you 75 % chances to win (based purely on your own assessment)...fantastic logic, I am wondering what are you doing for leaving, if it is not a secret !?

P.S. Deng is an average NBA player and his salary should not exceed $ 7-8M/year. In order to prove that point of view, watch his next contract...I almost guarantee you those numbers.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Jon Barry "Luol Deng is not a number 2 scorer, when Boozer comes back hes a number 3 scorer, hes not a guy who can create off the dribble"

Pretty much dead accurate.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Leave it to Jon Barry to either state the bloody obvious, or make an @#$ of himself.


----------



## BullsBaller (Oct 6, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Jon Barry "Luol Deng is not a number 2 scorer, when Boozer comes back hes a number 3 scorer, hes not a guy who can create off the dribble"
> 
> Pretty much dead accurate.


The Bulls clearly need more scoring power after watching these last 2 games. Putting Korver in at 2 might take some pressure off of Deng and get him going to where he needs to be. If he can't be consistent then a trade needs to happen. We still need Melo.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

BullsBaller said:


> The Bulls clearly need more scoring power after watching these last 2 games. Putting Korver in at 2 might *take some pressure off of Deng and get him going to where he needs to be. If he can't be consistent then a trade needs to happen. We still need Melo.*


A.) Where is Deng supposed to be? He's averaging 20 a game. And he's turned himself into a very good 3pt shooter. (at least in a small sample size). Should he be averaging 25 a game? What does the guy have to do in order to get a little love from Bulls fans?

B.)You do remember the Melo talks included Noah right? How awful would we be right now without Deng and Noah? Noah's averaging 16 and 14, Deng's averaging 20. It is amazing to me that any bulls fan would still want that trade.

C.)You guys need to realize that Boozer is also on this team. He is a 20 and 10 guy. Which pushes Deng into a perfect role as a third option. This team will be money once it is all together. Don't panic.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> A.)...What does the guy have to do in order to get a little love from Bulls fans?


Punch any scumbag in the face ! I really start hating Deng, after he refused to retaliate to Posey actions. 



caseyrh said:


> B.)...You do remember the Melo talks included Noah right? How awful would we be right now without Deng and Noah?


No, you got it wrong, my friend. The Melo talks included Deng (Noah was primary object and Chi was allowed to dump Deng, if they want to)...please stop playing with words. 

We like Noah and definitely dislike Deng (because of his idiotic contract, we lost a set of good players - Nocioni, Gordon, Kirk, Salmons, Miller) and don’t put Deng and Noah in the same basket.



caseyrh said:


> C.)...Which pushes Deng into a perfect role as a third option


No...he was signed and paid as the second option (remember his historical “shoulder” statement). We don’t want *Deng* to play as a third or fourth option and get paid *$12M/year*...we could have Salmons for $8M and Kirk or Gordon instead. 

*How many more good player (for the next four years) we are going to fail bring to the team because of Deng’s contract and JR greed ?!*


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> Punch any scumbag in the face ! I really start hating Deng, after he refused to retaliate to Posey actions.


And yet you love Miller and Hinrich who didn't punch Rondo.



> No, you got it wrong, my friend. The Melo talks included Deng (Noah was primary object and Chi was allowed to dump Deng, if they want to)...please stop playing with words.


Yeah they included Deng _and_ Noah. Where do I have it wrong? 


> We like Noah and definitely dislike Deng (because of his idiotic contract, we lost a set of good players - Nocioni, Gordon, Kirk, Salmons, Miller) and don’t put Deng and Noah in the same basket.


Lets see...

Salmons is making 8 mil averaging 10 ppg on 32% fg 
Nocioni is making 7 mil averaging 9 ppg on 42% fg
Gordon is making 11 mil averaging 20 ppg on 56% fg
Kirk is making 9 mil averaging 9 ppg on 40% fg
Miller is making 4 mil averaging 4 ppg on 20% fg

So with the exception of Gordon who is coming off of a terrible year but is off to a white hot start (but also doesn't play D and is certainly not a "playmaker"). All of these "good" players are not scoring. And yet they are getting paid an awful lot of money. I wonder how much you would complain about them if they were still here? Considering how much you whine about us overpaying a defender that averages 20 ppg.



> No...he was signed and paid as the second option (remember his historical “shoulder” statement). We don’t want *Deng* to play as a third or fourth option and get paid *$12M/year*...we could have Salmons for $8M and Kirk or Gordon instead.


Ive already pointed out how much money good teams play their third options. paying Deng the amount we pay him is reasonable and not going to hurt this franchise.



> *How many more good player (for the next four years) we are going to fail bring to the team because of Deng’s contract and JR greed ?!*


Well we won't be losing out on any good players because of the 3 or 4 mil you believe Deng is overpayed (although I don't see a lot of 20 ppg scorers, who play very good D making 8 mil). As for JR's alleged greed I can't really see how that has hurt us in the past few years.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

truth is deng can score 30 points a game and it wouldn't matter because he cant be counted on to do it by himself and all 2nd options on good teams need to be able to do that ...and not just do it but in the 4th quarter when it counts.

deng by virtue of watching him these many years simply doesn't qualify.

you look at the top teams in the league and the all have at least 1 extra guy who can be counted on to score on their own consistently to ease the burden on their #1 guy


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> truth is deng can score 30 points a game and it wouldn't matter because he cant be counted on to do it by himself and all 2nd options on good teams need to be able to do that ...and not just do it but in the 4th quarter when it counts.
> 
> deng by virtue of watching him these many years simply doesn't qualify.
> 
> you look at the top teams in the league and the all have at least 1 extra guy who can be counted on to score on their own consistently to ease the burden on their #1 guy



Right. That's Boozer. So we're set.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> And yet you love Miller and Hinrich who didn't punch Rondo.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




+1. Perfectly put.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> truth is deng can score 30 points a game and it wouldn't matter because he cant be counted on to do it by himself and all 2nd options on good teams need to be able to do that ...and not just do it but in the 4th quarter when it counts.
> 
> deng by virtue of watching him these many years simply doesn't qualify.
> 
> you look at the top teams in the league and the all have at least 1 extra guy who can be counted on to score on their own consistently to ease the burden on their #1 guy


+10. Perfectly put as usual !!!


I am not sure what Casey and his “influential” supporters are trying to prove...imo, they just want to stick to their original opinion and that is it (btw, it is so silly).

So here comes $1M question:

If you are a team Manager and you need to make selection between the following players (assuming that all positions are equally important and all players are available for the same price- $8M) :

1.	Deng
2.	Gordon
3.	Kirk


Who it will be ?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

Bulls96 said:


> +10. Perfectly put as usual !!!
> 
> 
> I am not sure what Casey and his “influential” supporters are trying to prove...imo, they just want to stick to their original opinion and that is it (btw, it is so silly).
> ...


all things being relative its an easy choice , its gordon.(2nd options are harder to acquire than 3rd options rationale) 

but in all honesty you dont decide things like that in a vacuum , there are plenty of scenerios depending on team specifics where deng would come in 1st ...and some where he would come in 3rd, depending on the team and what it needed.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Right. That's Boozer. So we're set.


yup all we need is jerry sloan and some uglier uniforms and its jazz east...which is a fine 50+ win but not quite championship level squad.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> truth is deng can score 30 points a game and it wouldn't matter because he cant be counted on to do it by himself and all 2nd options on good teams need to be able to do that ...and not just do it but in the 4th quarter when it counts.
> 
> deng by virtue of watching him these many years simply doesn't qualify.
> 
> you look at the top teams in the league and the all have at least 1 extra guy who can be counted on to score on their own consistently to ease the burden on their #1 guy


First off as Jnrjr pointed out we have Boozer so your whole point is meaningless because Deng is our third option when this team is healthy.

Second I don't buy this argument anyways. Look at Boston, Ray Allen is the second option there and he scores in a very similar way to how Deng scores. 

Third, but even if you are right that teams need that and Deng can't do it. It still isn't an indictment on Deng. Because teams need what Deng does also. How many players in this league are good defenders, good rebounders, good 3pt shooters, good slashers, and can drop 15-20 a night without needing to hold onto the ball much at all? Players like that are extremely valuable and every team wants guys like that. 

Instead of always looking at what Deng doesn't do (mainly handle the ball and create) why not look at what he does do and the value that has? I look at him being even more important to this team because he does not need the ball in his hands to be effective. Which allows D Rose to be more effective.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> If you are a team Manager and you need to make selection between the following players (assuming that all positions are equally important and all players are available for the same price- $8M) :
> 
> 1.	Deng
> 2.	Gordon
> ...


IMO this isn't even close. Deng is much better than the other two.

For one he's 6'9. He is the best all around player by far. No point in breaking down all of their strengths and weaknesses but I don't even think this is close. 

I don't see any scenario in which a team would choose either of these guys over Deng. Just not happening.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> yup all we need is jerry sloan and some uglier uniforms and its jazz east...which is a fine 50+ win but not quite championship level squad.


Jazz don't have players comparable to Deng and Noah. So this argument doesn't fly.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

caseyrh said:


> First off as Jnrjr pointed out we have Boozer so your whole point is meaningless because Deng is our third option when this team is healthy.
> 
> Second I don't buy this argument anyways. Look at Boston, Ray Allen is the second option there and he scores in a very similar way to how Deng scores.
> 
> ...


ummm...ok :chill:

1. it always matters, boozer is hurt right now so the team needs to be able to ease rose's burden and deng is showing he cant be a legit #2 option....and if you read my posts I wrote at least 1 guy who could be a #2 is on the top teams , the celts have 3 guys who Pierce can depend on to so he doesn't have to do it all himself. the heat have James , wade and bosh. The magic have vince and lewis to help howard. even the hawks have jamal crawford to help out johnson late in games so teams cant pile up on their star.

its not just the star that makes the team its also the guys that support him ...and alot of the time that means scoring too.

2.allen actually has a strong proven history of being able to score by himself without the need of picks and screens...and i would actually call garnett the #2 guy there possibly even rondo now before ray.

3, everyone has roles to perform in , Rose's role is to be the star, deng is who he is and there is nothing wrong with that , but on a team that demands profitability before winning the resources are scarce at times and deng's salary which shouldn't be a problem for the most profitable team in the nba is an issue, instead of an 8 million dollar player now the bulls may only spend 4 or 5 mil. and quality on another roster spot is compromised because of spending limits , I really dont have a problem with how much deng makes , more power to him , but on the bulls he really doesn't produce at his income level and ownership has shown they wont absorb the blow so there will be less spending elsewhere to make for it...its a problem i've had with the bulls for quite some time, unfortunately deng bears the brunt of it because every other night i see him under performing according to his pay...he makes more than noah who is already better than him, if i had my druthers they'd pay every1...but they wont so some players will be dealt for the bulls bottom line and its been proven time and time again.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> First off as Jnrjr pointed out we have Boozer so your whole point is meaningless because Deng is our third option when this team is healthy.


This thread is about Deng as a second option not about him as a third option. Obviously hes a solid 3rd option, but the point is we NEED HIM to perform as our second option until Boozer comes back, heck hes freaking paid like one. Hes just not a good second option.



> Second I don't buy this argument anyways. Look at Boston, Ray Allen is the second option there and he scores in a very similar way to how Deng scores.


Are you comparing the 25 year old Deng to the 35 year old Ray Allen and trying to make it sound like its a good and fair comparison lol. Ray Allen is one of the greatest shooters to have ever set foot in the NBA, this is a guy who just lit up the Bulls in the playoffs for 50 points! When was the last time Loul Deng even came close to putting up 50 points in the playoffs? 



> Third, but even if you are right that teams need that and Deng can't do it. It still isn't an indictment on Deng. Because teams need what Deng does also. How many players in this league are good defenders, good rebounders, good 3pt shooters, good slashers, and can drop 15-20 a night without needing to hold onto the ball much at all? Players like that are extremely valuable and every team wants guys like that.


And yet nobody is knocking down our door to get this great talent. 



> Instead of always looking at what Deng doesn't do (mainly handle the ball and create) why not look at what he does do and the value that has? I look at him being even more important to this team because he does not need the ball in his hands to be effective. Which allows D Rose to be more effective.


Once Deng demanded to be paid like a star the standards are set. In the words of the great Gordon Ramsey "NOT GOOD ENOUGH!"


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> ...I really dont have a problem with how much deng makes , more power to him , *but on the bulls he really doesn't produce at his income level and ownership has shown they wont absorb the blow so there will be less spending elsewhere to make for it*...its a problem i've had with the bulls for quite some time, unfortunately deng bears the brunt of it because every other night i see him under performing according to his pay...he makes more than noah who is already better than him, if i had my druthers they'd pay every1...but they wont so some players will be dealt for the bulls bottom line and its been proven time and time again.


...BINGO, no one can say it better – thank you so much !!! 

I hope our friend Casey will accept this main argument and move on to another subject, such as ..."*I hate Tim Duncan front hair line*", for example


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> ...Once Deng demanded to be paid like a star the standards are set. In the words of the great Gordon Ramsey "NOT GOOD ENOUGH!"


I like that statement too, very accurate !!! 

Please tell us *thebizkit69u*, why do you hate Deng so much ... ?!


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

I dont consider myself a Deng hater but i am just tried of his lack of toughness and inconsintency. Friday night in the first half 0-4 not pts and 2 TO's. I mean that just awful. And to address somt things said above Deng's defense is not that great mostly due to his lack of good lateral foot movement and he is a below average rebounder. What he can do is shoot the mid ranger jumper. IMHO JJ will be a better all around player than Deng by the end of the season. Just one example that has happened the last two games. How many offensive fouls must he get including on fast breaks. Just awful. The guy cant finish and he is way to upright a player in the fast break unlike JJ.

This team has several players who can play the SF and i would trade Deng for Iggy straight up and play iggy at SG and start JJ and Korvel off the bench with Brewer.

d


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Bulls96 said:


> Please tell us *thebizkit69u*, why do you hate Deng so much ... ?!


This may surprise Casey but I dont hate Deng. Honestly I just think hes overpaid and is an average player player at the 3. The fundamental difference is that Casey looks past the money, if Deng was paid 6 million a year I doubt anyone would have a problem with him but we are talking about an 11 million dollar 3 who cant dribble, create or take his man one on one. Heck to be honest I could probably live with it if thats it but his salary is only going to go up, in the last year of his contract we will be starting a 14 million dollar 3 who cant create, dribble or take his man one on one... Just ask Utah how happy they are with their own overpriced and limited SF.


----------



## King Joseus (May 26, 2003)

If Deng was paid 6 million a year, he'd be a bargain. Unfortunately, more often than not, you've gotta overpay in this league.

I think centering on the money issue ignores the positives he brings. I think the middle ground between the two "camps" on Deng is about where he's at.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> This may surprise Casey but I dont hate Deng. Honestly I just think hes overpaid and is an average player at the 3. The fundamental difference is that Casey looks past the money, if Deng was paid 6 million a year I doubt anyone would have a problem with him but we are talking about an 11,5 million dollar 3 who cant dribble, create or take his man one on one. Heck to be honest I could probably live with it if thats it but his salary is only going to go up, in the last year of his contract we will be starting a 14 million dollar 3 who cant create, dribble or take his man one on one... Just ask Utah how happy they are with their own overpriced and limited SF.


You are so right ...I am 100% with you on it.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

giusd said:


> I dont consider myself a Deng hater but i am just tried of his lack of toughness and inconsintency. Friday night in the first half 0-4 not pts and 2 TO's. I mean that just awful. And to address somt things said above Deng's defense is not that great mostly due to his lack of good lateral foot movement and he is a below average rebounder. What he can do is shoot the mid ranger jumper. IMHO JJ will be a better all around player than Deng by the end of the season. Just one example that has happened the last two games. How many offensive fouls must he get including on fast breaks. Just awful. The guy cant finish and he is way to upright a player in the fast break unlike JJ.
> 
> This team has several players who can play the SF and i would trade Deng for Iggy straight up and play iggy at SG and start JJ and Korvel off the bench with Brewer.


Yes you are ... yes you are the Deng Hater ! 

Any critics regarding Deng and our forum’s court-martial officials will issue infractions (a summary offence, without the right to a jury trial and/or indictment without any chances to appeal). If I am not mistaken I have like five of them ... so, please be careful pal


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Honestly all of you who are anti Deng are making really bad arguments.

1.) Deng is worth well over 6 mil, it's crazy that anyone here would even throw out that number. Fact.

2.) Saying Deng is such a poor second option is interesting. Considering he was like the 5th highest scoring second option in the NBA last year. (fact check it if you want I'm going off of memory). And he is averaging 20 ppg right now.

3.) One of you pointed to the Boston game and how he scored 0 points in the first half. And yet he scored 20 points after the first half. Including 2 huge threes to tie the game up. How come that doesn't get mentioned? And the same person also questioned his D. Maybe you should have taken a look at the game in question? Pierce was 4-14 for 10 points in 43 minutes against Deng. We certainly didn't lose that one because of the pierce Deng matchup...

4.) Pointing to Ray Allen's age is meaningless because we are talking about championship teams and the need for a second option that can score. Allen is the second option on the Celtics who are currently a championship caliber team. So I don't need to talk about 25 year old ray allen its irrelevant.

5.) Nobody anti Deng seems to appreciate defense... It's like this is an unimportant part of the game to you guys and when evaluating players we should just solely look at how good they are at scoring. Oh wait I mean how good they are at scoring off the dribble... because scoring off the ball is not important? And who cares about defense and rebounding also right? 

6.) Ignoring Boozer is hilarious. Really you guys should be complaining about Deng not being a good third optiuon. Cause thats what he is. A lot of teams would be in trouble if they lost a 20 and 10 power forward, who is their second option. Of course a lot of teams wouldn't have a third option that scores 20 ppg but why look at facts.


Here's what I want you guys to do. Look up all of these second options, that you claim are so much better than Deng. Then tell me how much they actually score. And then tell me how much money they make. Do that for me please...

I'd love to hear you guys actually put forth a decent argument, with a little research and some numbers. Cause your opinions aren't cutting it. And neither are the Jon Barry halftime quotes.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

caseyrh said:


> Honestly all of you who are anti Deng are making really bad arguments.
> 
> 1.) Deng is worth well over 6 mil, it's crazy that anyone here would even throw out that number. Fact.
> 
> ...


reading is fundamental....most people here understand a legit 2nd option isn't just about stats.

and if it were you would be well off anyway....deng was like 40th in the nba in scoring last season...in a 30 team league i'm pretty sure he wasn't 5th 2nd scorer...more like 13th, possibly more i stopped counting .

http://www.nba.com/statistics/playe...itScope=GAME&qualified=N&yearsExp=-1&splitDD=

and this whole topic is specifically about scoring...it seems you dont get that somehow.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> yup all we need is jerry sloan and some uglier uniforms and its jazz east...which is a fine 50+ win but not quite championship level squad.



Didn't we already know that?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> First off as Jnrjr pointed out we have Boozer so your whole point is meaningless because Deng is our third option when this team is healthy.
> 
> Second I don't buy this argument anyways. Look at Boston, Ray Allen is the second option there and he scores in a very similar way to how Deng scores.
> 
> ...



Indeed. Deng plays a role. Plus, you want guys who can score without having to create for themselves. I'd rather have Rose and Boozer creating with the ball in their hands and Deng moving without the ball, coming off screens, etc. As a third option, he has a perfectly appropriate skill set.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

giusd said:


> I dont consider myself a Deng hater but i am just tried of his lack of toughness and inconsintency. Friday night in the first half 0-4 not pts and 2 TO's. I mean that just awful. And to address somt things said above Deng's defense is not that great mostly due to his lack of good lateral foot movement and he is a below average rebounder. What he can do is shoot the mid ranger jumper. IMHO JJ will be a better all around player than Deng by the end of the season. Just one example that has happened the last two games. How many offensive fouls must he get including on fast breaks. Just awful. The guy cant finish and he is way to upright a player in the fast break unlike JJ.
> 
> This team has several players who can play the SF and i would trade Deng for Iggy straight up and play iggy at SG and start JJ and Korvel off the bench with Brewer.
> 
> d



JJ? Really?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> reading is fundamental....most people here understand a legit 2nd option isn't just about stats.
> 
> and if it were you would be well off anyway....deng was like 40th in the nba in scoring last season...in a 30 team league i'm pretty sure he wasn't 5th 2nd scorer...more like 13th, possibly more i stopped counting .
> 
> ...



If he was the 13th second scorer, wouldn't that make him an average second option?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> If he was the 13th second scorer, wouldn't that make him an average second option?



i dont know like i said i stopped counting there were teams whose leading scorers didn't score as much as deng...but i dont believe the farce put in front me with that anyway, pure numbers dont mean as much as the manner in which they are attained ...for instance by that logic whoever scores more is the best scorer ...

that would mean jamison , david lee and david west are better than duncan,chris paul , paul pierce gasol and deron williams at scoring.

the 1st 3 are good scorers, the next 5 are some of the better scorers in the league, HOF quality scorers....but last year the 1st 3 avg. more points.

but according to a poster more scoring equals better scoring...ergo the 2nd scorer stuff from casey...i actually dont agree , but he got his own _facts_ wrong. i just thought i'd point that out.

bottom line a good 2nd option is a consistent source of offense that they can create for themselves and others, and lessens the burden on their main guy, especially late in games.

there are legit guys who do that , deng just isn't one of them. its not an aspersion its just a fact.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> reading is fundamental....most people here understand a legit 2nd option isn't just about stats.
> 
> and if it were you would be well off anyway....deng was like 40th in the nba in scoring last season...in a 30 team league i'm pretty sure he wasn't 5th 2nd scorer...more like 13th, possibly more i stopped counting .
> 
> ...


Of course that list has no minimum games qualification. It has many people who played half a season or less.


I was going off of Espn's which uses minimum qualifications:

http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/p...er-game/sort/avgPoints/year/2010/seasontype/2

He is 33rd on that list. I don't have time right now but I will edit this later with an update on where he ranks among second options

*Alright I spent the time to look into it. And I was off by 2 spots. 

Last season Deng was actually the *7th highest scoring second option in the NBA*.

Behind: Billups, Maggette, Crawford, Gay, Wallace, Harrington.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> i dont know like i said i stopped counting there were teams whose leading scorers didn't score as much as deng...but i dont believe the farce put in front me with that anyway, pure numbers dont mean as much as the manner in which they are attained ...for instance by that logic whoever scores more is the best scorer ...
> 
> that would mean jamison , david lee and david west are better than duncan,chris paul , paul pierce gasol and deron williams at scoring.
> 
> ...



I think I would take your point there. If you want a 2nd scorer who can really create for himself and his teammates, that's not Deng. Deng is a system scorer who moves without the ball and hits shots coming off of screens and slashing. I like having a guy like that because there is only one basketball and not everyone should be a create for himself type of player.

I think Deng is a very good #3 option, which is precisely what he is for this team. Do I wish he made less money? Sure. But, that doesn't have anything to do with whether or not he's a good third scoring option.


----------



## giusd (Apr 17, 2003)

i have nothing to add from above since i agree with most but my issues with Deng are: (1) he is just soft; (2) he is very inconsistant and for the most part disappears in the 4th quarter; and (3) he does not bring much energy to the court.

Just a look at the bulls last 4 games backs up these statements. Zero pts in the first half at Boston and they two 3 pt-ers at the end of the game. And he played awful NY and what their SF from europe lit him up for 20 pts in the first half. 

That is not going to get it done.

d


----------

