# Still think Hinrich hasn't improved?



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

Are the doubters still doubting Hinrich's improvement over his rookie season? He definitely had a sluggish start to the season, but his play of late has bumped his averages up to be very respectable. Without his solid play against the Hornets, we may not have won that game...as of 1/6, his stats are now:

15.9 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.5 apg (only 2.3 TO)
*40.3 FG%...35% 3-pt...84.5% FT*
1.4 steals, 36.8 minutes

Statistically, it's not a gigantic improvement as you can see over last year...but the thing that stands out to me is that he is shooting more, scoring more, and hitting shots at a higher percentage overall, both from the field and from the line. His assist-to-turnover has always been solid, but it's even a bit better than last year as well. Let's also not forget the kid's been defending SG's who are typically 2-4 inches taller than him, and doing a decent job to boot. Alot of people here are overlooking his solid play, so I wanted to give credit where credit's due. Anyone else ready to give it up for Kirk?


----------



## unBULLievable (Dec 13, 2002)

No doubt.Kirk is going to get better and better.Heck if the Bulls come close to .500 by end of january he could be at the All star game.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>yodurk</b>!
> Are the doubters still doubting Hinrich's improvement over his rookie season? He definitely had a sluggish start to the season, but his play of late has bumped his averages up to be very respectable. Without his solid play against the Hornets, we may not have won that game...as of 1/6, his stats are now:
> 
> 15.9 ppg, 3.8 rpg, 6.5 apg (only 2.3 TO)
> ...


He's definitely been playing better the last few weeks. Up until then, stats-wise, he _hadn't_ improved from last season, but he's taken a step forward. He's become less afraid to take open shots (sometimes to a fault) and the lack of hesitation is helping his FG% a little bit.

I've always liked Kirk; I've just never been googly over him some people, our broadcast team included. Their over-the-top love for him from the start always got on my nerves a bit.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

I'm also not "googly" over Kirk but I'll give credit where credit is due--he is playing great ball and putting up great numbers especially considering the fact that he's playing out of position and shares the court with another high-assist distributor in Duhon.

I do like the kid a great, great deal.


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BealeFarange</b>
> I do like the kid a great, great deal.


I don't know if you called him "the kid" on purpose, but that's actually the most annoying thing Red and Dore have always done is call him that. The guy's older than at least five or six guys on the team. It's not a big deal, but it always annoyed me because it just doesn't make sense. And because, well, it's annoying.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Good ball player...but Gordon has exposed him as a "B" tier NBA player.


----------



## Lizzy (May 28, 2002)

"The Kid" annoys me too because that's Garnett's nickname. 

I don't know about stats and all that but I sure feel a hell of a lot better when Kirk is on the court and running the offense. There isn't a stat for that. He just seems to control the situation better than anyone on the team.


----------



## BealeFarange (May 22, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>PC Load Letter</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know if you called him "the kid" on purpose, but that's actually the most annoying thing Red and Dore have always done is call him that. The guy's older than at least five or six guys on the team. It's not a big deal, but it always annoyed me because it just doesn't make sense. And because, well, it's annoying.


Hehe, sorry...I just kind of did that subliminally. I pretty much call all the Bulls "kid"...even though I'm not particularly older than them or something. It does seem funny to call him "Kid" as a constant nickname given that he's older than pretty much all our other top players...but I must admit to liking it when they called him "The Rook" last year. Won't work ever again, though.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>BealeFarange</b>!
> I'm also not "googly" over Kirk but I'll give credit where credit is due--he is playing great ball and putting up great numbers especially considering the fact that he's playing out of position and shares the court with another high-assist distributor in Duhon.
> 
> I do like the kid a great, great deal.


Not to turn this into another one of THOSE threads, but.....

* Kirk has been asked to move to SG to make room for a rookie (second round even) to play at PG.

* The Bull drafted yet another combo guard at the #3 position.

* The roll of closer is quickly being given to Gordon.

.....yet no Guard controversy?!?! Shouldn't Kirk step up to the mic and let everyone know how the franchise is "disrespecting" him and mishandling him?  Doesn't he have a spine? Doesn't he have a family to feed? What's with this guy?!?!


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>PC Load Letter</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know if you called him "the kid" on purpose, but that's actually the most annoying thing Red and Dore have always done is call him that. The guy's older than at least five or six guys on the team. It's not a big deal, but it always annoyed me because it just doesn't make sense. And because, well, it's annoying.


Compared to Red Kerr, nearly everyone is a kid.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

he's getting smarter , but i dont know i'd say he is any better than last season , take a look at his stats the last few months of the previous year and his current stats are in the same ballpark, there is just an obsene amount of overhyping going on with him , and its not about him at all because he seems quite unassuming, and likeable, the initial feelings of most are very accurate, good but not great , great teammate unselfish , an excellent spporting player, a 3rd or fourth guy ideally . just not stockton like people hyped him to be , more like hornecek, hopefully people will be able to accept that and not turn on him later.


----------



## HuejMinitZ (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re:*

FYI for anyone that missed it, a couple days ago on NBA Fastbreak, the second all-time assists leader in the game, Mark Jackson ended a piece on Hinrich by saying that he has the potential to be a combination of Jeff Hornacek and John Stockton.

Also, he is one of the three best defensive guards in the game, period.

Not a champion of the guy, just a hater of haters.

So lay off all you haters.

Rick Majerus is my Co-pilot.

- Tempo Pusher


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

*Re: Re:*



> Originally posted by <b>HuejMinitZ</b>!
> FYI for anyone that missed it, a couple days ago on NBA Fastbreak, the second all-time assists leader in the game, Mark Jackson ended a piece on Hinrich by saying that he has the potential to be a combination of Jeff Hornacek and John Stockton.
> 
> Also, he is one of the three best defensive guards in the game, period.
> ...


I always felt that Hinrich and especially watching him this season reminded me of Jeff Hornacek. That is not a disrepect at at Bulls fans because Jeff was a really good player and it was a joy for me watching him play


----------



## Qwst25 (Apr 24, 2004)

This might be the first time in Kirk Hinrich's career that his shooting percentage for a season is over 40%. I hope I didn't just jinx him.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> Good ball player...but Gordon has exposed him as a "B" tier NBA player.


Agree completely with the good (not great) assessment. He'll never be a superstar, but then again, neither was Jerry Sloan, so that's OK.

However, I don't think Gordon has exposed anything about Hinrich that we didn't already know.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

*stockton and horny*

The big difference between Stockton/Hornacek and Hinrich is that Stockton/Hornacek were deadeye shooters.

Kirk is not. Maybe someday... but certainly not now. We're doing back flips about him being a hair over 40% this season.


Hornacek is nearly a 50% career shooter and Stockton is over 50% on his career.

Hinrich... 1.5 years into his career ... is sub-40%.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: stockton and horny*



> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> The big difference between Stockton/Hornacek and Hinrich is that Stockton/Hornacek were deadeye shooters.
> 
> Kirk is not. Maybe someday... but certainly not now. We're doing back flips about him being a hair over 40% this season.
> ...


Stockton at age 38:

.504 FG%
.462 3Pt %
8.7 APG
2 SPG
11.5 PPG

His best season:
.514 FG%
.415 3Pt %
14.5 APG
3 SPG
17.2 PPG

Career:
.515 FG%
.384 3Pt%
10.5 APG
2.17 SPG
13.1 PPG

19 seasons.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

*Re: Re: stockton and horny*



> Originally posted by <b>DaBullz</b>!
> 
> 
> Stockton at age 38:
> ...



Yeah, these stereotypes are getting a bit predictable and annoying. I think Kirk will improve upon his percentage. As much as Horny and Stock, I don't think so. 'twould be great though.

Still, I think Hinrich is rock-solid and I'm psyched to have him on our team.


----------



## Johnny Mac (May 6, 2003)

Yeah, the Stockton and Hornacek comparisons are old. I think Hinrich is more like Bibby than anyone, maybe Nash but Nash has been playing at a level this year that Kirk will most likely never reach. 

But Hinrich is a lot like Bibby, except Hinrich is more athletic, stronger and taller. Its just a matter of polishing his game.


----------



## HuejMinitZ (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re:*

Total disregard for player's defense typical board behavior. 

Hinrich better athlete than both players. Yes.


----------



## BEEZ (Jun 12, 2002)

*Re: Re:*



> Originally posted by <b>HuejMinitZ</b>!
> Hinrich better athlete than both players. Yes.


And that meant what. Gerald Wallace was probably a better athlete than Mike but was he better player/ HELL NO.

PS What I just said is not true but just stated to show how pointless this part of your post was.


----------



## Bolts (Nov 7, 2003)

It bothers me to compare a seasoned and esperienced Stockton to a second year player.

Stockton - y1 5.6 pts 5 assists 47% shooting
Hinrich 12 pts 6.8 assists 39% shooting

Stockton - y2 7.7 pts 7.4 assists 48% shooting
Hinrich 15.9 pts 6.5 assists 40% shooting

Now MAYBE if Stockton shot it as much as Hinrich has his %'s would have been lower as a newer player.

It is also tough to compare disimilar offensive systems. Who got better shots? If both are wide open is there a major shooting advantage for either one?

When KH develops a reliable floater his % will climb several points.


----------



## Snuffleupagus (May 8, 2003)

John Stockton :

3P%:

84-85: .182
85-86: .133
86-87: .184
87-88: .358
88-89: .242

Jeff Hornacek :

3P%:

86-87: .279
87-88: .293
88-89: .333

_________________________

Hinrich is a better 3-point shooter in this stage of his career than Hornacek or Stockton were.


----------



## SecretAgentGuy (Jul 15, 2003)

Actually, in the last 10 games Kirk has gone 67/150 which is <b>44.6%</b>. Whether he keeps it up or not is another story.


----------



## Bball4me (Dec 4, 2003)

_It is also tough to compare disimilar offensive systems. Who got better shots? If both are wide open is there a major shooting advantage for either one?_ 

Don't forget the zone.
Everybody's shooting percentage went down with the allowance of zone defense, including Stocktons.
That's just another reason why it's difficult to compare players who played at different times.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Horncek and especially Stockton were above average fg% guards for their day.

Hinrich is a below average fg% guard for the modern time.

This is not saying that Hinrich is not a solid player... just that Stockton and Horny are probably not the best old time players to compare him to.

Heck, even Bibby is a career 45% shooter with his lowest year being his rookie year of 43%.

Hinrich is not an efficient shooter at this stage of his career. 

But... I like him anyway. No one is perfect.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

OK, let's get silly. Why compare him to guys who are in rocking chairs now. Year 2 stats:

PPG APG TO/G FG% 3pt%

Hinrich 15.9 6.5 2.3 40.3 35.0

Kidd 16.6 9.7 4.1 38.1 33.6

Nash 9.1 3.4 1.3 45.9 41.5

Marbury17.7 8.6 3.1 41.5 31.3

Bibby 14.5 8.1 3.0 44.5 36.3

Francis 19.9 6.5 3.3 45.1 39.6

OK, do I think KH belongs in this company? No. But since so many folks like stats here, I thought it was worth a look. At least Hinrich isn't last in any category.


----------



## Wynn (Jun 3, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kukoc4ever</b>!
> Hornacek and especially Stockton were above average fg% guards for their day.
> 
> Hinrich is a below average fg% guard for the modern time.
> ...


I know I'm bustin your balls here, but same argument has been made against Crawdaddy and you've refused to concede that Crawford is "not an efficient shooter at this stage of his career".

Consistency?


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Wynn</b>!
> 
> 
> I know I'm bustin your balls here, but same argument has been made against Crawdaddy and you've refused to concede that Crawford is "not an efficient shooter at this stage of his career".
> ...


I don't think I ever claimed that Crawford is an efficient scorer.

I do think there is more to the game than just a fg%.


----------



## yodurk (Sep 4, 2002)

I guess the thing I was trying to stress in this thread is that Hinrich seems to be gradually becoming more efficient. And that's what SHOULD happen as players grow and mature in this league. I always liked Hinrich and I hope he's a Bulls for life...but my only knock on hm is that he's not quite an efficient player. He seems to be learning how to do that. Of course he'll never be a Stockton, but I do think he'll be every bit as good as Bibby like someone else mentioned. His stlye of play even reminds me of Steve Nash a little bit, the way he can dribble in-and-out of the lane in traffic. I think he certainly has similar potential as Nash as well, with maybe slightly less offense and even more defense. I think Kirk will someday be a consistent 15 ppg scorer at a 45% clip. With the other qualities he brings to the game, I'll definitely take that.

Btw, I agree Hinrich was overhyped a bit by some last year (simply because there was nothing else for Bulls fans to cheer about!)...however, I don't see any overhyping of him anymore, except by Tom and Johnny. I actually felt some of his contributions have been overlooked, which is why I started this thread. Nice discussion by those who've contributed.


----------



## Bolts (Nov 7, 2003)

In 5 years, the snot-nosed rookie pgs coming in to the league are going to be compared to Hinrich. He'll still be a starting PG. He'll have improved year to year. Heck, he may even make an all-star team once or twice. I think the sky is the limit. 

It is interesting to me that he is only compared to all-star and hall of fame PGs.

Should we compare him to starting PG's Brevin Knight, Bobby Sura, Mo Williams, Marko Jarik, Chucky Atkins, Damon Jones (maybe a sg) Tyronn Lue, GARY PAYTON (this year), Willie Green (or whoever is playing with Iverson up top) Rafer Alston, Jason Terry (until this week), Speedy Claxton/Dereck Fisher, Luke Ridenour, Jason Williams, Damon Stoudamire, Carlos Arroyo? Heck, even Sam Cassell.

That's the starting PG's on 17 teams. I would rather have KH on my team than any of these PG's.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Snuffleupagus</b>!
> John Stockton :
> 
> 3P%:
> ...


Bingo.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Snuffleupagus</b>!
> Hinrich is a better 3-point shooter in this stage of his career than Hornacek or Stockton were.


The 3pt shot was further back then, right?


----------



## svanacore (Nov 21, 2004)

I think Hinrich might become as good as Bibby but I don't think eh is a better athlete than Bibby.

And he is definitely not one of the 3 best defensive guards unless you are only talking about point guards.

I can name 10 guards wiht better defense.


----------



## Snuffleupagus (May 8, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> The 3pt shot was further back then, right?


True, good point, but the discrepancy is large enough that my statement still stands. Kirk is shooting 35% from 3 this year, 39% last year. I think his numbers would still be higher than theirs if the line was further back. 

Stockton was an awful 3 point shooter when he came into the league; he left as one of the best. Shooting is one area where guys can really improve over the course of their career.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Snuffleupagus</b>!
> 
> 
> True, good point, but the discrepancy is large enough that my statement still stands. Kirk is shooting 35% from 3 this year, 39% last year. I think his numbers would still be higher than theirs if the line was further back.
> ...


Boy, I hope your are correct that Hinrich keeps improving that shot. He is pretty dangerous as it is.

It is interesting how much Hornecek and Stockton improved. Awhile back, I looked for active players showing this type of improvement and had a hard time finding many or any.


----------



## such sweet thunder (May 30, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>yodurk</b>!
> I guess the thing I was trying to stress in this thread is that Hinrich seems to be gradually becoming more efficient. And that's what SHOULD happen as players grow and mature in this league.


There's another possibility that is equally likely:

Kirk has been forced into fewer bail-out situations as the Bulls have become more efficient on offense and other scorers have emerged. 

A component of Kirk, and Crawford's horid shooting percentage last season was that they were the only players on our team that had the skills to manufacture shots. Crawford has improved his fg percentage and is pushing 40% playing along side other scorers who can put the ball in the hoop. I don't see why Kirk would be any different. 

With, the emergence of Curry and Gordon the Kirk puting up huge numbers is no longer needed to win. He is able to take more shots in the flow of the offense, and isn't constantly given the task of manufacturing a shot when the team stagnates.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Hinrich has been great after the 0-9 start. Everyone except Luol Deng was doing awful during that start, and Deng has cooled off. In the 11-9 after the 0-9 start, 3 players have kicked it up a notch.

1. Ben Gordon
2. Eddy Curry
3. Kirk Hinrich

I think the winning has to be attributed to these 3 guys. The leader on the floor Kirk Hinrich, the good post scorer, and the closer/bench leader. These 3 guys in no particular order, must be given respect for the winning we have been doing lately.


----------



## HuejMinitZ (Dec 28, 2004)

*Re:*

Fact of the matter is the Bulls struggle when Hinrich leaves the game, and immediately improve when he re-enters. As a fan of the team, I feel much more confident when he's in the ballgame. 

He is showing good progress, more efficient running the team it seems despite similar numbers to last season.

Still not aggressive enough in my opinion. Curry scoring option #1, Gordon scoring option #2, Hinrich scoring option #3. Hinrich needs to know that - he might already, but he doesn't play like it sometimes.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> The 3pt shot was further back then, right?


As I recall, the line was shorter for a bit, but never longer than it is now. I could only find this one link 

I have to admit that I don't remember the mid-90s change, but if true, Stockton and Hornacek actually had an easier time of it for a couple years.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

Yeah where the line is at right now is the farthest it's ever been. They moved it in in the mid-90's and just recently moved it back.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

actually why not call him a smaller version of marko jaric 

KH (left) MJaric
PPG 15.9 | 11.0
RPG 3.8 | 3.6
APG 6.5 | 6.4
SPG 1.38 | 1.91
BPG .24 |.39
FG% .403 | .403
FT% .845 | .776
3P% .350 | .400
MPG 36.8 | 35.5


----------



## El Chapu (Oct 23, 2004)

This guy cant take care of the ball. Tonight against the Jazz is yet another example.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>El Chapu</b>!
> This guy cant take care of the ball. Tonight against the Jazz is yet another example.


Yeah, he had 6 TOs, but made up for it with 5 steals.


----------



## bullet (Jul 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>rwj333</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah, he had 6 TOs, but made up for it with 5 steals.


The other way around - 6 stls and 5 to's - so he still finished with + 1


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>bullet</b>!
> 
> 
> The other way around - 6 stls and 5 to's - so he still finished with + 1


Don't forget the one block. On Okur no less. :yes:


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

just to note: the six steals are a season/career best for kirk. (not that individual stats are the end all be all!)

and now, please allow me to post this quote from jerry sloan about kirk hinrich:




> After the last home game, Detroit coach Larry Brown praised Tyson Chandler. On Friday, Sloan took his turn praising a Bull, paying Kirk Hinrich perhaps the ultimate compliment.
> 
> "He has a *John Stockton* way about him," Sloan said. "If something goes wrong, you don't see emotion on his face. He just keeps playing. I always have called it playing forward, instead of playing backward. The guys who play backward, it takes them two minutes, two hours or two weeks to get back out of something that happened. Kirk's just a wonderful young player."
> 
> Hinrich acted genuinely surprised by Sloan's compliment.



thank you. and good morning. 




http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...lsbits,1,1861762.story?coll=cs-home-headlines


----------



## PC Load Letter (Jun 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>El Chapu</b>!
> This guy cant take care of the ball. Tonight against the Jazz is yet another example.


Turnovers per 48 mins. for the season:

Kirk Hinrich - 3.1
Andres Nocioni - 3.8

:wave:


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>PC Load Letter</b>!
> 
> 
> Turnovers per 48 mins. for the season:
> ...


Posting that type of statistic is akin to taking a quote out of context. Kirk is responsible for distributing the ball for the majority of the game, so obviously there will be more opportunities for him to commit turnovers. A more apt TO/48min. comparison would be to other Point Guards in the league:

Bibby - 2.9
Payton - 3.1
Miller - 3.4
Parker - 4.0
Nash - 4.4
Kidd - 4.6
Tinsley - 4.6

But why let facts get in the way of a good opportunity to bash Kirk?

From reading this board for just a few weeks, I'm completely astounded as to the way Kirk is continuously underrated by a large portion of Bulls fans.


----------



## Good Hope (Nov 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Frankensteiner</b>!
> 
> 
> Posting that type of statistic is akin to taking a quote out of context. Kirk is responsible for distributing the ball for the majority of the game, so obviously there will be more opportunities for him to commit turnovers. A more apt TO/48min. comparison would be to other Point Guards in the league:
> ...


He's not bashing Kirk, he's bashing Nocioni, who is the favorite of the guy PC quoted.


----------



## Frankensteiner (Dec 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Good Hope</b>!
> 
> 
> He's not bashing Kirk, he's bashing Nocioni, who is the favorite of the guy PC quoted.


WOOOSH!!

That would be the sound of PC's point going completely over my head.

However, my general comment on the Kirk bashing still stands.


----------



## MurcieUno (Dec 16, 2004)

Kirk = #12 in the program but... #1 in my heart....:grinning:


----------



## honk4tad (Feb 18, 2004)

Kirk=Daddy.

Don't hate.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Steve Francis, last season: 16.6 ppg, 6.2 apg, 5.5 rpg, 1.8 spg, 1.7:1 A/TO, 40% FG, 29% 3PT, 78% FT, *+17.10 Efficiency Rating.*

Kirk Hinrich, this season: 16.0 ppg, 6.8 apg, 3.8 rpg, 1.5 spg, 2.9:1 A/TO, 41% FG, 35% 3PT, 85% FT, *+17.29 Efficiency Rating.*

Francis made the All-Star team last year. Hmmmmmmmmm.


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> Francis made the All-Star team last year. Hmmmmmmmmm.


Was he voted in by the fans?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Yes.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>johnston797</b>!
> 
> 
> Was he voted in by the fans?


Of course he was, he has "mad hops". An attribute particularly critical to the point guard position.


----------



## jaja (Jan 4, 2005)

dont be jealous. you wouldnt be saying that if kirk had hops


----------

