# I Can't Hold Back Any Longer: Luol Deng



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

In a series of disappointments, the performance, or lack thereof, of Luol Deng stood out to me more than any other Bull (honorable mentions: Kirk Hinrich, Ben Wallace, Scott Skiles).
After rightfully taking advantage of favorable mismatches against an old Miami team, this series Luol seem to disappear in crunch time on offense(at least Hinrich took shots, although he missed them all), and be exposed on defense.
The images that will forever be ingrained in my mind are watching Luol get backed down in the post by Tayshaun Prince, time and time again, often starting out as far as the three point line, where Prince would get a shot from just several feet away.
Where is the will, where is the heart, at what point do you say to yourself that this stops right here. I won't let a 150 pound bag of bones back me down again.
On offense, I want the ball. I'm not going to stop cutting in the fourth quarter, and wait for my teammates try to draw a defender and kick it to me. I want the ball, and will try to create on my own if I have to.
Is Luol young: yes. Is he improving: yes. Was he one of our most consistent players during the regular season and our MVP against Miami: yes.
Did he show up in this series: No.


----------



## laso (Jul 24, 2002)

Fair comment. Most disappointing to me was his inability to stop Prince.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Prince is a very good player, and has an underrated post game. His lanky body makes it very easy for him to get good position on players. However, Luol is quite a bit bigger and I agree 100% with your dissapointment in him for getting bullied by the smaller guy. But you have to look at it objectively and realize that Prince is simply a better, smarter player (at this point in their careers).


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

There was a thread before this series that compared our PG, SG, and SF to Detroit's. I mentioned that people should not underrate Prince's game. He just isn't asked to go and score because they have 3 better options. Well, Well, Well, look who got owned on Chicago. I wish I wasn't right, but that was the X-factor leading to the end of the game. The fact that we could not stop Prince and if we doubled it came off the guy guarding Chauncey, and that Prince, McDyess, and CWebb owned the boards in the 3rd/4th.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

laso said:


> Fair comment. Most disappointing to me was his inability to stop Prince.


Check out the game thread. This is a hotly disputed point.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

kukoc4ever said:


> Check out the game thread. This is a hotly disputed point.


For anyone who watched the game, how the hell can you dispute it. It was obvious. Deng drops off of Prince, Prince nails the 3. Prince gets the ball at the 3 point line, the toothpick starts to dribble down, does a spin move, then spins back for the left handed hook (he is lefty). It happened time and time again. What about the play that McDyess shot a J from the side, missed it, Deng was going for the board, Prince snatches it away and dunks it. This happened for 4 possesions it seemed. Our team could not grab a defensive rebound. 

Stats don't always tell the story. Its the IMPACT you make with the stats that do. Prince had a bigger impact than Deng. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng were quiet most of the game. Hubie made a point saying how our Big 3 did not have as many FG attempts as they needed if they were to win the game.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> For anyone who watched the game, how the hell can you dispute it. It was obvious. Deng drops off of Prince, Prince nails the 3. Prince gets the ball at the 3 point line, the toothpick starts to dribble down, does a spin move, then spins back for the left handed hook (he is lefty). It happened time and time again. What about the play that McDyess shot a J from the side, missed it, Deng was going for the board, Prince snatches it away and dunks it. This happened for 4 possesions it seemed. Our team could not grab a defensive rebound.
> 
> Stats don't always tell the story. Its the IMPACT you make with the stats that do. Prince had a bigger impact than Deng. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng were quiet most of the game. Hubie made a point saying how our Big 3 did not have as many FG attempts as they needed if they were to win the game.


I agree with you. You have it nailed. It was frustrating to watch. I can't imagine how anyone with a clue would disagree, other than with some silly quibble.


----------



## charlietyra (Dec 1, 2002)

theanimal23 said:


> For anyone who watched the game, how the hell can you dispute it. It was obvious. Deng drops off of Prince, Prince nails the 3. Prince gets the ball at the 3 point line, the toothpick starts to dribble down, does a spin move, then spins back for the left handed hook (he is lefty). It happened time and time again. What about the play that McDyess shot a J from the side, missed it, Deng was going for the board, Prince snatches it away and dunks it. This happened for 4 possesions it seemed. Our team could not grab a defensive rebound.
> 
> Stats don't always tell the story. Its the IMPACT you make with the stats that do. Prince had a bigger impact than Deng. Gordon, Hinrich, and Deng were quiet most of the game. Hubie made a point saying how our Big 3 did not have as many FG attempts as they needed if they were to win the game.


Not a great game by Deng but at least he was somewhat productive. As to rebounds, where the hell was "Big Ben" Wallace. He totally disappeared. Was there ANY evidence that he had a bad back? Was there any story that you read that he was getting treatment for a bad back by Bulls trainers or a physician?


----------



## Brandname (May 24, 2006)

FWIW, Tayshaun Prince and Ruben Patterson are the two guys that Lebron just absolutely cannot defend in the post. 

Prince's length is almost impossible to defend. And he's got an automatic baby hook that he uses in the post. I don't know of anyone who can consistently stop him in the post.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

it's really no more complicated than to recognize the matchup was an issue of maturity against deng. for right now, prince is the superior player. prince mentioned in the post game that now in his fifth year, he's been in the ECF 5 times. he's performed at the highest level whereas this is deng's first real challenge. will deng surpass prince? maybe, maybe not. it was a real test, and deng came up short. i'm not going to blast him, his numbers for the series were respectable and for the most part matched prince's. deng's effort defensively was there, but his lack of experience against prince's game hurt him.

coupled with detroit's ability to exploit the bull defense when double teams came was the difference; the bull don't really have that player(s) yet.

all things in time.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

laso said:


> Fair comment. Most disappointing to me was his inability to stop Prince.


Fair enough. But Prince wasn't able to stop Deng either. I call it a draw between two of the top SFs in the game today. 

The series was lost on the boards and by the coaching failure to make adjustments to Detroit's zone until the Bulls were 3 games down.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I'm not calling out Deng, because we can call out every player in this series for a specific game. But Prince owned Deng yesterday. Gordon and Deng did not get the ball enough on offense. Ben Wallace went from Hero (Miami) to Zero (Detroit). Noce was hurt. PJ gave it his all. We can't ask the rookies to win us a game -- they aren't there yet. But the Deng-Prince matchup was key. It had huge impact. Then the foul by Kirk on the Billups 3 killed us too.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

McBulls said:


> Fair enough. But Prince wasn't able to stop Deng either. I call it a draw between two of the top SFs in the game today.
> 
> The series was lost on the boards and by the coaching failure to make adjustments to Detroit's zone until the Bulls were 3 games down.


Don't forget their backcourt pretty much own ours when it counted. I just can't get rid of this suspision that this is as good as it gets with our backcourt. As much as I like Ben and Kirk, this thought is depressing. Two short combo-gaurds playing 1 and 2.


----------



## Bulldozer (Jul 11, 2006)

When Tay punked Deng for that rebound and put it up for that easy flush, I knew it was over.

We knew all along Deng is a low ceiling player. Can he improve on that midrange J anymore? Some analysts were already saying he has the best in the league, and when it doesn't hit, Deng looks very average. I hope he develops another offensive move, maybe something similar to Tay's baby hook. All we keep hearing about is Deng's length, so this is something reasonable he could work in his repertoire. What I look forward to most though, is how he attacks the rim. He shows great effort there, and all he has to do is finish a bit better. He'll never be the greatest ballhandler, but he does have some explosion when he commits to where he wants to go (does lead to a charge at times). 

Deng's a player I've doubted too much, so I won't go there again since he's proved me wrong many times. He's a class act and warrior that I love to have on my team. I'd say he's untouchable, with the only way we trade him is if its straight up for (i.e. Gasol, which won't happen with the lack of contracts) _______ fill in a superstar.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

Brandname said:


> FWIW, Tayshaun Prince and Ruben Patterson are the two guys that Lebron just absolutely cannot defend in the post.
> 
> Prince's length is almost impossible to defend. And he's got an automatic baby hook that he uses in the post. I don't know of anyone who can consistently stop him in the post.


Exactly. Anybody who has ever played a game of basketball should know that if someone develops a hook shot that consistent, you ain't stopping it unless he misses it. It's just a physical impossibility especially if you are about the same height.

I had no problems with Deng this series as he seemed to be the one guy who'd score 20 and grab 6 boards every night and shoot 50%. Listen: this series could have easily been 3-3 after tonight. The Bulls had four games where they couldn't hit a fish in a barrel. Games 1-3 it was the Pistons defense, tonight the Bulls had open look after open look and they just didn't fall.


----------



## Chitownbulls74 (May 16, 2007)

If youre going to knock on Deng, how about adding the footnote that this is a kid whom is only 22 years old and still learning the nuances of the NBA game. If memory serves me correctly Deng didnt even play basketball as a youngster and he only played one season of college basketball. Give the guy a break. He is well ahead of the learing curve. So he got punked and didnt look good against an NBA team loaded with experience which understands every trick and nuance of an NBA game.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

I see what you are saying Chitownbulls74, but we might as well let the entire team off the hook except for the Vets for any loss. It makes sense. If you lose, its because you are young and played a better team. 

Fact is, Deng got owned. Fact is, I expected us to lose this series and I'd say we still have a great year. But it shows you what parts of the game Deng has to add/improve upon. You can't give players a free-bee just because they were beaten by a better team. I'm sure Deng won't give himself that and will be in the gym all summer. Its the only way to learn. 

But people may hate to admit it since Luol Deng is more untouchable here than John Paxson's office, but he was owned by Prince yesterday. But he wasn't the only Bull that got handled.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Chitownbulls74 said:


> If youre going to knock on Deng, how about adding the footnote that this is a kid whom is only 22 years old and still learning the nuances of the NBA game. If memory serves me correctly Deng didnt even play basketball as a youngster and he only played one season of college basketball. Give the guy a break. He is well ahead of the learing curve. So he got punked and didnt look good against an NBA team loaded with experience which understands every trick and nuance of an NBA game.


No doubt about it. Deng is an extremely impressive basketball player and all-around person.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

MPG	FG%	3p%	FT%	OFF	DEF	TOT	APG	SPG	BP TO PF PPG
Prince 40.1 .500 .500 .719 1.50 5.10 6.60 3.3 1.00 .40 1.40 1.50 17.3
Deng 40.8 .478 .000 .784 3.30 5.20 8.50 2.0 .50 .67 2.17 2.00 19.5

The stats say Deng outplayed Prince in this series.
More points. More rebounds, More blocks. Fewer steals and more fouls.

BTW. Curse the 3rd world word processor on this site. What you see is not what you get.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Def, K4E. Deng has proven me wrong. I'm not saying trade him, just that he needed to make a few more plays last night. Its a process. Our team will/hopefully get there in a year or two.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Wow. Deng is the only player on the entire team who showed up with anything even remotely resembling positive game-in/game-out consistency. And for that he gets a thread all to himself about how he disappeared in the series.

Despite being guarded by an all-defensive team small forward, and going up against a top 3 defensive team as a whole, Deng improved over his regular season ppg and rpg. He shot 48% and is the only core player who didn't completely disappear for multiple games.

Tay is an excellent small forward and had a nice run with his already deadly post-up hook move against Lu. Hubie even commented *in the first quarter *that the Pistons "traditionally go to Prince on the right side of the court for his post-up game in the 4th quarter of playoff games" and that they've been doing it for years. Gee, I wonder if they do that because he's good at it regardless of the opponent? 

In other words, what a load of crap. You want to say Prince had a nice game against Lu? A nice series? Fine. 

But don't go saying the only guy who truly showed up, is the one who disappeared for the series. If you are going to make a claim like that, then I want someone to find the players who were more consistent game to game than Deng in this series and back up the claim with some facts. 

He was the team's leading scorer in the series.

He had the highest fg% on the team in the series.

And he was the second highest rebounder (exceeding his regular season rebounding average) to only Ben Wallace and averaged a whopping 0.8 rebounds per game less than Big Ben.

Yeah, if only he'd shown up.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

McBulls said:


> MPG	FG%	3p%	FT%	OFF	DEF	TOT	APG	SPG	BP TO PF PPG
> Prince 40.1 .500 .500 .719 1.50 5.10 6.60 3.3 1.00 .40 1.40 1.50 17.3
> Deng 40.8 .478 .000 .784 3.30 5.20 8.50 2.0 .50 .67 2.17 2.00 19.5
> 
> ...


Deng has made more of an impact this series because he is a bigger part of our team than Prince is for theirs. But would you agree that Deng outplayed Prince yesterday? Would you say that Prince missed a few hooks or didn't get as many offensive rebounds the game could have been changed? I'm not blaming the loss on Deng, but I'm stating this because this is a Luol Deng thread. The blame goes to a lot of players for last night.


----------



## Chitownbulls74 (May 16, 2007)

Its not about letting anyone off the hook. Its about pointing out the obvious. If we played this series a hundred times, the Pistons would probably beat us 95 of those times. I dont think theres any shame to losing to a veteran team.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Chitownbulls74 said:


> Its not about letting anyone off the hook. Its about pointing out the obvious. If we played this series a hundred times, the Pistons would probably beat us 95 of those times. I dont think theres any shame to losing to a veteran team.


Not saying there is. I'm merely point out a few of the reasons we have lost in a thread specifically directed at Luol Deng.

We are going to get there and it will be soon. You can mark down we will have internal improvement from all the young-uns this offseason and hopefully that 9th pick can do something.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

Our perimeter players are fine. We need good big men. Nocioni, Tyrus, and Wallace brought almost nothing to the table at the 4/5 spots. PJ was really great for 1 half.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Luol was the closest thing resembling a Bulls team MVP in this series. I'd like to see a supported argument selecting anyone other than Lu.


----------



## eymang (Dec 15, 2006)

Maybe I'm in the minority but I think he is overrated, mainly by fellow Bulls fans, but hopefully another franchise also sees this and we can get something really good




Ron Cey said:


> Luol was the closest thing resembling a Bulls team MVP in this series. I'd like to see a supported argument selecting anyone other than Lu.


Huh? What do Luol do? I'd even look at Kirk before I look at Luol


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

I think what is getting lost in the shuffle of defending St. Luol, and what is at the heart of my original argument, is if Luol is to be considered more than just a good role player, if it wants to be an all-star, he needs to consistently do two things:
1) Taking over offensively in crunch time. Demand the ball if his teammates aren't finding him, and create his own shot
2) HAVE THE WILL, THE HEART, NOT TO GET BACKED DOWN OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY A THINNER, WEAKER PLAYER. Not to keep giving up that ground. To stand up, and be that Sudanese warrior. This is what was most disturbing to me, that he didn't get so pissed off to say, no more of this. He just keep letting it happen.
I'm not saying others weren't accountable, I just expected more of Luol.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Bulls42 said:


> I think what is getting lost in the shuffle of defending St. Luol, and what is at the heart of my original argument, is if Luol is to be considered more than just a good role player, if it wants to be an all-star, he needs to consistently do two things


This is a good point.

I love Deng, but we needed a guy like Gasol in this series. 

We probably also needed a guy like Deng in this series as well though.

Still, the peremiter would have been a lot more open for guys like Hinrich and Gordon to operate if Gasol was our starting 4, IMO.


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> This is a good point.
> 
> I love Deng, but we needed a guy like Gasol in this series.
> 
> ...


No, the players that we needed to win this series are JC, TC and EC. Yes, I am trying to save your time. Isn't this what you really want to say, K4E? I head you. More than enough. "Found Moeny", Yes. "47", Yes. "Only two more wins in two years since", Yes. I hear you all. So please please save some.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

lgtwins said:


> No, the players that we needed to win this series are JC, TC and EC. Yes, I am trying to save your time. Isn't this what you really want to say, K4E? I head you. More than enough. "Found Moeny", Yes. "47", Yes. "Only two more wins in two years since", Yes. I hear you all. So please please save some.


Please, stop the personal attack posts.

You are following me around from thread to thread and posting stuff like this. 

If you want to talk Bulls basketball, please, I’d love to.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

eymang said:


> Huh? What do Luol do? I'd even look at Kirk before I look at Luol


Then do it. Break it down game in and game out and explain why Hinrich, and not Lu, is the Bulls team MVP for the Detroit series.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Bulls42 said:


> I think what is getting lost in the shuffle of defending St. Luol, and what is at the heart of my original argument, is if Luol is to be considered more than just a good role player, if it wants to be an all-star, he needs to consistently do two things:
> 1) Taking over offensively in crunch time. Demand the ball if his teammates aren't finding him, and create his own shot
> 2) HAVE THE WILL, THE HEART, NOT TO GET BACKED DOWN OVER AND OVER AGAIN BY A THINNER, WEAKER PLAYER. Not to keep giving up that ground. To stand up, and be that Sudanese warrior. This is what was most disturbing to me, that he didn't get so pissed off to say, no more of this. He just keep letting it happen.
> I'm not saying others weren't accountable, I just expected more of Luol.


Thats just rhetoric. I'd like to see you defend your original premise that he was a no-show in this series. You said he didn't even show up. Those are big words. Defend them.

Break it down. Go through the games. 

Tell me who showed up bigger, more consistently, more often. 

I'm willing to discuss the facts and have my mind changed through legitimate discourse.


----------



## kukoc4ever (Nov 20, 2002)

Deng was the MVP for the Bulls this series. He played very well and is a huge part of the core of this team going forward.

Can't say enough good things about Luol Deng. Great player. Great person. He showed up this series and was one of the few players that held his own in their individual match up, IMO.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

RC: My points are not rhetoric. Re-read post as they outline specifics that happened in each game throughout the series. I guess I will write them again.
On offense: not demanding ball, creating in crunch time. Only hoping a teammate finds him in his spot. Maybe that's all he can do. Maybe he will never be that player and I am hoping for too much.
On defense: getting backed down and exposed throughtout the biggest moments of game 3 and 6 by a physically weaker player and not doing anything about it. Missing crucial rebounds in the final minutes of Game 6 to Prince.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

I have great respect for Prince. A 6-9 spider who can consistently hit the step-back 3 AND finish post-ups with a positively sweet jump hook are tough to defend. By the way, when you hard-body him in the post, he has a very nice drop-step move that he explodes out of. Nice, nice player.

Deng had a nice postseason. He's a very good player who will further improve because no one works harder at it. I expect him to improve his range out to the 3-pt line. He also might just watch some tape of Prince and come back with a much-improved post-up game.

The Bulls clearly must improve, but singling Deng out for your wrath strikes me as very, very curious.


----------



## bre9 (Jan 8, 2006)

Agree with this post every one always talkin about how he's the superstar on this team he can't create his own shot and is extra sloppy with the ball. Prince really did him in in this series.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Bulls42 said:


> RC: My points are not rhetoric. Re-read post as they outline specifics that happened in each game throughout the series. I guess I will write them again.
> On offense: not demanding ball, creating in crunch time. Only hoping a teammate finds him in his spot. Maybe that's all he can do. Maybe he will never be that player and I am hoping for too much.
> On defense: getting backed down and exposed throughtout the biggest moments of game 3 and 6 by a physically weaker player and not doing anything about it. Missing crucial rebounds in the final minutes of Game 6 to Prince.


It is rhetoric, and its based primarily on the 4th quarter of Game 6 Despite that, you said Deng was *a series no-show*, and I think I've proven pretty convincingly that this is a completely bogus statement.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

bre9 said:


> Agree with this post every one always talkin about how he's the superstar on this team he can't create his own shot and is extra sloppy with the ball. Prince really did him in in this series.


Yeah, Prince dominated him to the point that Deng could only muster 20/9 on 48% shooting. 

How'd Gordon do relative to that, bre?

If there's a guy I'm tired about hearing of as a star, its pissed-my-pants-for-4-straight-games-on-the-biggest-stage-of-my-life Gordon.


----------



## anorexorcist (Aug 3, 2005)

Seriously, if there's anyone who should be deserving the brunt of our wrath, it's the three stooges--Gordon, Hinrich and Nocioni--for chucking up absolutely STUPID 3 pointers.

All the credit goes to Deng for eliminating the 3 from his game and focusing on the high percentage shots. Excellent season for him, he is the future of this team.

Despite being outmuscled by Tay last night he'll be much better in the future.


----------



## bre9 (Jan 8, 2006)

Ron Cey said:


> Yeah, Prince dominated him to the point that Deng could only muster 20/9 on 48% shooting.
> 
> How'd Gordon do relative to that, bre?
> 
> If there's a guy I'm tired about hearing of as a star, its pissed-my-pants-for-4-straight-games-on-the-biggest-stage-of-my-life Gordon.


Gordon is going to be an allstar before Deng because Ben can create and get hot. Only thing Gordon needs to do is be more consistent next year and he'll be an allstar. And Prince abused Deng in the post with those baby hooks and he shot so many threes on Deng.


----------



## sov82 (Nov 5, 2003)

McBulls said:


> MPG	FG%	3p%	FT%	OFF	DEF	TOT	APG	SPG	BP TO PF PPG
> Prince 40.1 .500 .500 .719 1.50 5.10 6.60 3.3 1.00 .40 1.40 1.50 17.3
> Deng 40.8 .478 .000 .784 3.30 5.20 8.50 2.0 .50 .67 2.17 2.00 19.5
> 
> ...


If you REALLY believe Deng outplayed Prince, you are solely mistaken. Stats are important but they do not tell the whole story. Deng proved in this series that he is an average defender who needs A LOT more leg strength and has a very limited post up / face up game. I was happy to see his passing improve in Game 6, however.

Deng is not a play maker. He is a nice system player who is improving. I hope he becomes more advanced with the ball in his hands but I have my doubts. Also, I'm not sure he'll ever be an average 3 point shooter as his shot lacks arc.


----------



## Simpleton (Feb 18, 2005)

sov82 said:


> If you REALLY believe Deng outplayed Prince, you are solely mistaken. Stats are important but they do not tell the whole story. Deng proved in this series that he is an average defender who needs A LOT more leg strength and has a very limited post up / face up game. I was happy to see his passing improve in Game 6, however.


It's a good thing Deng has 5 years to get to the level Prince is at right now then, wouldn't you say?

Something tells me it won't take that long though.


----------



## sov82 (Nov 5, 2003)

anorexorcist said:


> Seriously, if there's anyone who should be deserving the brunt of our wrath, it's the three stooges--Gordon, Hinrich and Nocioni--for chucking up absolutely STUPID 3 pointers.
> 
> All the credit goes to Deng for eliminating the 3 from his game and focusing on the high percentage shots. Excellent season for him, he is the future of this team.
> 
> Despite being outmuscled by Tay last night he'll be much better in the future.



The Bulls should have run more plays for Gordon. He should have taken more 3s. His shot was actually on last night. He just didn't get enough shots.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

> Gordon is going to be an allstar before Deng because Ben can create and get hot.


Right, I keep forgetting that creating off the dribble = the game of basketball.



> Only thing Gordon needs to do is be more consistent next year and he'll be an allstar.


I don't disagree with that. But it has nothing to do with Luol Deng.



> And Prince abused Deng in the post with those baby hooks and he shot so many threes on Deng.


Right. Who cares about the team-high 23 points on 50% shooting Hamilton dropped on Gordon? 

I'm not starting threads ripping Gordon. I like Gordon. I'm just pointing out the absurdity of highlighting Deng when he's undeniably the only player that showed up every game in the series and was hands down the series MVP for the Bulls.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

sov82 said:


> The Bulls should have run more plays for Gordon. He should have taken more 3s. His shot was actually on last night. He just didn't get enough shots.


He took 9 threes and 18 total fga. That is the most 3s attempted and most field goals attempted among all players from *both* teams.

After watching Gordon brick shots (.360 fg% in games 1-4 and 6) and kick the ball all over the court for 5 of 6 games, I don't want to hear about him in a thread ripping Luol Deng's play in the Detroit series unless its to acknowledge that Gordon stunk like day-old catfish bait on a blazing summer afternoon.


----------



## theyoungsrm (May 23, 2003)

i dont think people realize....no one is stopping that hook when its on. not bowen, not artest, not nobody. deng ain't the best defender in the world, but i don't think his defense was the problem.

as for not calling for the ball more, and taking more shots, thats not his game. i do not expect him to get the ball at the top of the kep and go to work like a gordon or hinrich would. 

at best you could say deng didn't particularly elevate his game. which is a good thing to say compared to the poor performances of "dribble, dribble, dribble, hinrich" "ball till i fall gordon" "15 mil = 9 rebounds wallace"


----------



## lgtwins (May 18, 2004)

kukoc4ever said:


> Please, stop the personal attack posts.
> 
> You are following me around from thread to thread and posting stuff like this.
> 
> If you want to talk Bulls basketball, please, I’d love to.


I don't think I did that as an personal attck on you. I did that toward your ever present one-line snide backhand slap on the curent Bulls in almost all of your posts. Like couple of other posters mentioned in other thread recently, your one-line snide remark gets old real fast and tiresome. It leaves a bad taste in my mouth and I am expressing that. And ask your moderation.


----------



## rwj333 (Aug 10, 2002)

I don't see how criticizing Deng has anything to do with Gordon. Deng is the best player on the team and is frequently labeled as such by the media. With that label comes unreasonable expectations by certain people. 

He played very well against one of the best SFs in the league.


----------



## souleater (Apr 21, 2007)

i agree ,poor defender although he has long arms and a player that can not defend ,in a skiles team,has no place,the only thing he can do is shooting that mid range jump shot


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

i expect deng to emerge as top option on this team next year.

unlike gordan and kirk, deng has great size and a ridiculous wingspan.
he has the work ethic to get stronger and improve on his deficencies.

so i think he'll have what it takes to be more assertive and share the load that kirk and gordon have been forced to carry. 
balancing that burden would do wonders for our guards consistency as well.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Deng was our best player in this series. Criticizing him is beyond silly. He wasn't as good as he was against Miami, but who expected him to be? He bested his season stats for the series and didn't disappear from a single game. Who else on our roster can you say that about? Most of our other top players were no-shows, or at least struggled, for AT LEAST TWO games. Deng had one game where I'd say he struggled and even then he put up numbers, just not as efficiently as usual.

I don't see how Deng's performance showed a lack of heart or strength. Prince's post game isn't predicated on dislodging the defender with brute strength, it's on being slippery, and moving side to side with long strides. His hook shot is unguardable 1 on 1. Deng moved his feet and denied him, but Prince's hook was just better than good defense yesterday. I disagree with people saying he gave ground. If he tries to cut off Prince's movement he gets a blocking foul out by the 3 point line and Princes goes to the line. Prince's patience on those isolations makes it almost impossible to keep him from getting good position eventually. He sets up that hook shot with 8-10 seconds of dribbling. 

Simply put, Prince has been a big time player in 4th quarters since his rookie year. He outplayed Deng in that quarter and was more important than anyone in putting Detroit over the top. I credit Prince for being a savvy, clutch player, but I won't criticize Luol's effort or heart. An excellent veteran player made a few more plays than he did. It happens. I'm not thrilled about it, but I'm not gonna throw our excellent young player under the bus when there are so many other reasons why we lost 4 games. If anyone will learn from the experience and come back better for it, it's Luol Deng.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

I disagree. Luol was backed down with simple back to the basket bumps. There was no deception or moves to the sides (until Prince was right under the hoop). It was tug of war and Luol lost every time. That's why I question a super thin guy backing down Luol.


----------



## bre9 (Jan 8, 2006)

Ron Cey said:


> Right, I keep forgetting that creating off the dribble = the game of basketball.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Deng was horrible against the Pistons I don't even know how he scored twenty points a game it didn't come out to a win. Are star player Deng didn't lead us out the series.


----------



## bre9 (Jan 8, 2006)

Ron Cey you was the first person to bring up Gordon's name.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

Bulls42 said:


> I disagree. Luol was backed down with simple back to the basket bumps. There was no deception or moves to the sides (until Prince was right under the hoop). It was tug of war and Luol lost every time. That's why I question a super thin guy backing down Luol.


Prince did indeed make space for himself moving side to side. With his ultra-long strides, he moves in arcs and makes his way to the hoop without pounding directly on his defender. If Deng tries to slide in front of that, he gets a foul called on him. In fact, if anything, it was the reverse of what you just said and Prince used his shoulder and hips to make that final bit of space for himself when he got close enough to take his hook shot. That's what I saw. Prince can get his hook shot off against almost any defender he's likely to match up against. Luol didn't get stops on him, I agree. It's too bad. But laying the blame at Luol's feet is crazy. None of our main guys (Luol included) hit shots when needed. Luol was hitting at a decent clip for most of the series.

If a simple lack of strength was the culprit, Luol will be in the weight room to remedy it. He made good progress last offseason and I expect that to continue. He can build up his base/lower body strength some more. He might still have a little filling out to do generally.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

bre9 said:


> *Deng was horrible *against the Pistons I don't even know how he scored twenty points a game it didn't come out to a win. Are star player Deng didn't lead us out the series.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

I will make my final point on this.
I felt like, as a fan, at the United Center, that the Prince-Deng isolation, was a metaphor for the series. Here you had the Pistons, during crunch time in Games 3 and 6, basically taking the ball, backing down, and shoving it down our throats.
Here you had, Luol Deng, representing our team, our best shot, being out-manned/muscled by Prince who was moving in arcs or straight lines or whatever trajectory he took (looked like a straight line from my view at the UC) right to the hoop. Without resistance. Or if there was resistance, it was not enough.
And it represented weakness to me. The fact that we couldn't stop this.
Is was like watching a man beat up a boy. At is sucked to watch. And I feel like, despite our age, we should have fought harder. We should have reached deeper within. Because it was about strength of will. And not just Luol, but Wallace, Gordon, Hinrich, they all didn't have it. And Detroit did.
and I'm spent on this shi-


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

bre9 said:


> Ron Cey you was the first person to bring up Gordon's name.


False. The opening post to this thread claimed that Deng was more of a series no-show than Gordon. 

Deng exceeded his regular season production in the series and Gordon sucked.


----------



## RagingBulls316 (Feb 15, 2004)

Who cares who was more of a no show? The Pistons were the better team this year. Get over the loss, and look forward to next year.

It's pointless to argue who was worse, all our guys put forth 100% effort every game. And if you don't think they did, your kidding yourself. The players wanted to win more then anyone here. We know Deng and Gordon both work their asses off trying to get better, and you can't blame them for their shots not falling. Give credit to Detroit for playing good defense that took the Bulls as a entire team, not individuals out of their offense.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

The point of this thread is to discuss Luol Deng. Other guys can be discussed, but the focus is on Deng. Either way you cut it, if the play is defendable or not, he was Luol's man on defense and for the box-outs. Luol did a horrible job on both. AGAIN, Luol is part of the reason for last night's loss. Kirk is another. Ben(s) are another. Everyone is held accountable for this loss. Not one player, minus PJ's first half excelled. Sure the numbers might be there but the ball should have been in the hands of Lu and Ben more often. 

Luol is part of the reason for last night's loss. I can't complain about his play this series. Because the majority of our team did not show up until Game 3, and for only part of that game.

I just want Luol to learn how to play inside a la Prince and gain some lower body strength. This isn't a thread saying Trade Lu, he won't be a star, etc. It's just an analysis of last night's game. 

Luol is going to be a good player. Franchise Player? I doubt it. I don't think anyone on our team is a franchise player. But if our guys work on their weaknesses, take away the Good and Bad from this playoff run, they will be better off. Last night's play on Prince was a lesson for Deng. Again, all of our guys have lessons to learn from this series. If there was a thread about Kirk or Ben, I'd be saying it in there for those guys.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Ánimal, this thread commenced on the premise that Lu was a no show for the SERIES. 

If people don't want to face Gordon's crappy play, then don't premise the argument on the notion that Deng, moreso than the rest of the team, failed to show up for the series.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

theanimal23 said:


> Either way you cut it, if the play is defendable or not, he was Luol's man on
> I just want Luol to learn how to play inside a la Prince and gain some lower body strength. This isn't a thread saying Trade Lu, he won't be a star, etc. It's just an analysis of last night's game.


All the lower body strength in the world won't stop a hook shot. The man defender can hold his place, but he'll never block the shot if it has enough arc. It takes a double team. The good news is that back down plays ending in hook shots, including Prince's, are slow to develop and are vulnerable to blocking by help players on the back side. Obviously the farther out you can make the hook shot the more difficult it is to double team. Unfortunately, Prince was shooting hooks from 15+ feet, and no help came for Deng in the fourth quarter. The Bulls were essentially counting on Prince to miss the shots. 

Tyrus Thomas, Ben Wallace and PJ Brown all took similar shots in this series; usually at a closer range, that Detroit had no answer for either. The trick is to be able to make the shot-- which most players are not terribly good at--and not take all day in doing it. This is the low post lost art that so many on this board spend so much time pining for. But it also works for wing players at longer distances if they have the talent.

Give credit to Prince for making difficult shots at a critical time in the game.
Wish for Deng to develop a similiar shot if you like.
Or, blame the Bulls defense for not doubling Prince. 
But blaming Deng's man defense is a little silly.


----------



## Babble-On (Sep 28, 2005)

I think Lou was capable of doing a better job on the boards than he did in game 6, and I also was kind of dissapointed in how let Prince back him all the way down into the paint, to the spot where he could get that little hook, all the way from around the 3 point line pretty much at will. I don't blame him for Prince getting open jumpers, I blame the nature of the Bulls' defensive scheme.

I also don't blame him for not taking over games offensively. He is a complimentary scorer. He relies on either the offense being run effectively or for the guys who can create opening things up for him for the most part. Maybe he can add the ability to go in the post and beat the occasional defender of the dribble in the future. Though, I think he has become such an effective player despite being an off the ball scorer that I'm not sure how good an idea it is to try taking him outside of that realm. It might just be better to get a guy who is a bonafide slasher and or post up player who can open up better oportunities for Lou and the others.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

McBulls said:


> But blaming Deng's man defense is a little silly.


Maybe if Deng was stronger, the toothpick couldn't keep backing Deng down. Yeah it's tough to stop a hook, but it's not impossible to keep a guy from getting good position/backing you down.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

I think Deng's stats were a bit hollow. Last night, for example, he make a couple of buckets in the last minute or two when the outcome was pretty much decided, but bricked em or couldn't get the ball when it mattered. And he couldn't get a stop when it mattered.

So yeah, he didn't fall completely flat on his face, but that doesn't mean his limitations were noticeable, which was in and of itself worth noting.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

I think it's fair to consider the "what if?" scenario had Paxson traded Deng and PJ Brown for Gasol. Would we have done better against Detroit?

Seems to me Deng was right there at his season averages. You can't expect guys to play way over their heads consistently to win.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> I think it's fair to consider the "what if?" scenario had Paxson traded Deng and PJ Brown for Gasol. Would we have done better against Detroit?



Has there been a single report that that was the deal?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

The bottom line to me is this:

Deng was the Bulls' best player in the playoffs.

Deng got worked last night by Tayshaun.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Has there been a single report that that was the deal?


Yes, it's been posted several times.

From a Memphis paper.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> Yes, it's been posted several times.
> 
> From a Memphis paper.



Didn't it include the pick as well?


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Didn't it include the pick as well?


The pick wouldn't be playing against Detroit this past series, would he?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

DaBullz said:


> The pick wouldn't be playing against Detroit this past series, would he?


Indeed. I was just making sure there wasn't some iteration of that deal I'd not heard about.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

jnrjr79 said:


> Didn't it include the pick as well?


The last two reports I read sounded pretty definitive that the Griz would have taken Brown, Deng and Thabo. They didn't require the pick but they wanted a bit more than just Deng and Brown too.


----------



## McBulls (Apr 28, 2005)

With Nocioni hurt, the Bulls might not have gotten out of the first round without Brown, Deng and Thalbo and only Gasol in return. They would have been swept by the Pistons with no-one to guard Prince, and everyone would be crying about how we need a small forward.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

McBulls said:


> With Nocioni hurt, the Bulls might not have gotten out of the first round without Brown, Deng and Thalbo and only Gasol in return. They would have been swept by the Pistons with no-one to guard Prince, and everyone would be crying about how we need a small forward.


West offered Warrick, too.


----------



## TomBoerwinkle#1 (Jul 31, 2002)

If you had asked me at the beginning of the season if I would include Deng as part of a package -- with or without the pick, depending on the deal -- for Gasol, I'd have said it was a no brainer.

By the time of the talk of the Gasol deal, I was a lot less sure I wanted to part with Deng for Gasol straight up (PJ and any other peices being salary matching requirements) but I still wanted to see the deal done. 

By season's end, I've become a huge, huge Deng fan and I am grateful he remains a part of the Hinrich/Gordon/Deng triumverite.

We still need that scoring big guy, but as for now, I think Deng for Gasol would have filled a need at a cost too great.

In other words, I think we'd still be gone fishin' by the end of the Detroit series, but we would not be looking as bright as we are moving forward.

I think we can get what we need from a big to complete the needs of this young, unique team. Certainly we could have got a quality 3/4 in the draft, but I have truly come to believe that Deng brings something to the table that is hard to replicate.


----------



## T.Shock (Feb 11, 2003)

McBulls said:


> All the lower body strength in the world won't stop a hook shot. The man defender can hold his place, but he'll never block the shot if it has enough arc. It takes a double team. The good news is that back down plays ending in hook shots, including Prince's, are slow to develop and are vulnerable to blocking by help players on the back side. Obviously the farther out you can make the hook shot the more difficult it is to double team. Unfortunately, Prince was shooting hooks from 15+ feet, and no help came for Deng in the fourth quarter. The Bulls were essentially counting on Prince to miss the shots.
> 
> Tyrus Thomas, Ben Wallace and PJ Brown all took similar shots in this series; usually at a closer range, that Detroit had no answer for either. The trick is to be able to make the shot-- which most players are not terribly good at--and not take all day in doing it. This is the low post lost art that so many on this board spend so much time pining for. But it also works for wing players at longer distances if they have the talent.
> 
> ...


Thank you. I swear some people have never even played a game of basketball in their lives. Back in high school, my friend who didn't play basketball at all but was significantly bigger and stronger than me (I was about 185 and could bench that, he was about 225 and could bench about 250), would get posted up by me every time we played in my driveway. He was stronger than me, but I backed him down doing the same exact things Prince did last night. Left-to-right, in arcs, make him slide his feet backwards a little bit everytime. 

No matter how strong Deng is, with Prince's height and strength, if he wants to get to the basket, he will. Deng can put his hands on him (that's a foul), so all he can do is body him. That hook shot is unstoppable unless a double comes and forces Prince to give up the ball.


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

just thought i'd throw this in since it was brought up.
trade rumors from memphis' commercial appeal. seems mostly detailing chicago packages. 
no detail about what memphis' filler would be, if any.

Feb 3


> Team president Jerry West is adamant about receiving top-dollar compensation for Gasol. The desired deal is sending Gasol to Chicago for Luol Deng, PJ Brown and his expiring contract along with Ben Gordon or Andres Nocioni or Kirk Hinrich or Thabo Sefolosha.


Feb 6


> The team with the best chance of making a deal with the Grizzlies is the Chicago Bulls. Grizzlies president Jerry West wants forward Luol Deng (6-9, 21 years old), forward Andres Nocioni (6-7, 27), and veteran P.J. Brown (6-11, 37) and his expiring contract.


Feb 23


> Chicago, the Grizzlies' preferred trade partner, never negotiated with any players from its nucleus on the table. The Griz wanted at least Luol Deng, P.J. Brown's expiring contract and one of the Bulls' rookies.


Mar 18


> After Gasol asked Grizzlies owner Michael Heisley to seek a trade back in January, West was looking to deal with the Bulls. He wanted Deng, along with Andres Nocioni and a draft pick. Paxson wasn't willing to break up his team, which has been a contender in the Eastern Conference all season


----------



## SALO (Jun 6, 2002)

Thanks RoRo. 

People like to pick and choose what it would have taken to complete the Gasol deal. We'll never know for sure, those papers are just speculating. Some of those Memphis papers were saying they weren't interested in the Knicks pick at all, which I don't believe for a second. 

We know Pax was on the radio and he was quoted as saying West wanted "substantially more" than just Luol Deng.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

TomBoerwinkle#1 said:


> If you had asked me at the beginning of the season if I would include Deng as part of a package -- with or without the pick, depending on the deal -- for Gasol, I'd have said it was a no brainer.
> 
> By the time of the talk of the Gasol deal, I was a lot less sure I wanted to part with Deng for Gasol straight up (PJ and any other peices being salary matching requirements) but I still wanted to see the deal done.
> 
> ...


I said at the time that I would trade Deng for Gasol. I said afterwards that I'd do it. And yeah, I'd still do it. Nothing against Deng...I think he's a wonderful player, it's just that Gasol would add more of a new dimension to the Bulls arsenal than the Nocioni-for-Deng exchange would give up. It doesn't matter though. Brown's contract has expired and the salary cap stuff no longer works.

So now I'm desperately pulling for Deng to get so good that he makes me look like a complete idiot for ever having suggested that the Bulls should trade him. There's more than a decent chance of this happening. I think that next season we'll see a Deng who is effective from 3-pt range and has a bit of a post-up game. GO LUOL!!


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

Of course we'll get blasted for it, Deng is greater than God on this board. Say it was indefensible or what, Deng did not make enough plays vs Prince the last game. The entire team is faulted for the loss, but Deng was outplayed. Sorry for the blasphemy!

Yeah the hook is difficult to defend. So why not play D that keeps Prince from getting the ball into a position he likes. Use your body. Deng is weaker than he looks. He has not had success posting up on smaller guys (ie Eric Snow, Wade, etc). He needs to work on his game. Deng needs to use his body more and keep defenders like Prince from getting good position. Yeah the hook is defensible, so what? Should no one get the blame? I guess there is no way to defend a Prime-Shaq. He has a hook. What about Kobe? The fade-away is just as unstoppable. Might as well give up and say theres no way to defend it, I might as well not body him up when is backing down.

Fact is: Prince made plays on Deng by posting up and getting crucial rebounds. People don't want to accept that, then fine. Their Boo is Perfect. 

I'm not blaming the loss solely on Deng, but in a thread dedicated to Deng, I'm pointing out instances where he could have done better and the outcome could have been different.


----------



## BULLHITTER (Dec 6, 2005)

> Fact is: Prince made plays on Deng by posting up and getting crucial rebounds. People don't want to accept that, then fine. Their Boo is Perfect.
> 
> I'm not blaming the loss solely on Deng, but in a thread dedicated to Deng, I'm pointing out instances where he could have done better and the outcome could have been different.


i didn't read where any post considered him anywhere near perfect, but calling him out amidst all the other obvious flaws is simply shortsighted when it's clear the pistons themselves game planned for deng and gordon, and their abilities *at this time *aren't enough to get the team over the top. many great players experience failures before they understand what's necessary to become a consistent winning player. calling him out now only means if he's going good, he'll have certain fans support; if he doesn't, then blast him cause he's *not supposed *to fail, heaven forbid.


i don't believe that minus deng et al and with gasol the bull would be better; but that's another dead horse i don't want to revive. therefore, i would be mindful of the fact that while deng came up short *this time*, when it's all said and done i expect his successes will compensate for the disappointment you've experienced this season.


----------



## Roscoe Sheed (Jun 19, 2006)

Jameh said:


> Prince is a very good player, and has an underrated post game. His lanky body makes it very easy for him to get good position on players. However, Luol is quite a bit bigger and I agree 100% with your dissapointment in him for getting bullied by the smaller guy. But you have to look at it objectively and realize that Prince is simply a better, smarter player (at this point in their careers).


bigger in what sense? Aren't they both 6'9" and skinny?


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

If anything, Luol Deng proved that he is the franchise player of the Bulls during the playoff run. This kid's going to be really good.


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

So Prince makes a handful of plays at Lu's expense and now he's a massive disappointment with a low ceiling? Some people even seem to be conceding he was our best player in the series while simultaneously ripping him to shreds. So what does that mean? That we should devote a week for the next few months to discussing how each player failed in the series? The negativity is just a bit much for me sometimes. Lu didn't suddenly become a superstar who creates his own shot and takes over the game late when the playoffs started. Big shocker. How that vastly diminishes the potential of a 22 year old with a great chance to make the All-Star team next year or renders him a failure is beyond me. 



theanimal23 said:


> Of course we'll get blasted for it, Deng is greater than God on this board. Say it was indefensible or what, Deng did not make enough plays vs Prince the last game. The entire team is faulted for the loss, but Deng was outplayed. Sorry for the blasphemy!


I don't think anyone has disagreed with that premise. The issue is more the need to start a thread calling him out as a no show and a disgrace.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Roscoe Sheed said:


> bigger in what sense? Aren't they both 6'9" and skinny?


Deng weighs more than Prince, Prince looks like a twig in comparison.

http://www.givemetherock.com/images/pistons/prince.jpg[IMG]

[IMG]http://www.bestsportsphotos.com/image.php?productid=16722

Deng is clearly thicker than Prince.


----------



## BlakeJesus (Feb 1, 2006)

Roscoe Sheed said:


> bigger in what sense? Aren't they both 6'9" and skinny?


Deng weighs more than Prince, Prince looks like a twig in comparison.










Deng is clearly thicker than Prince.










EDIT: Not sure why but the Deng picture isn't showing up, just click on the link.


----------



## darlets (Jul 31, 2002)

Deng will benefit from another season in the weight room to get STRONGER. He might bulk up alot or not, but he will get stronger after another off season.

In the play offs you have to be able to guard someone. I think Deng can stand to improve in that area some. Paxson has built a successful regular season team, now they have the work in front of them to be come a contending finals team.


----------



## theanimal23 (Mar 2, 2005)

JeremyB0001 said:


> I don't think anyone has disagreed with that premise. The issue is more the need to start a thread calling him out as a no show and a disgrace.


I never said he was a no-show. All I said was there were crucial points of the game where he did not make the play, but the opposing player, whom was his reponsibility did. 

In a Luol Deng specific thread, I called out Luol Deng. Must have been a surprise to a lot of people. 

In all seriousness, I think it this board has elevated Luol Deng to such status that you can't point out the fact that it was his guy who made huge plays down the stretch. Again, as I have said, the loss isn't solely on Deng. But in a Luol thread, I'm going to point that out. Actually I'll point that out regardless. Sure, he is younger, and will mature, blah blah blah. But I'm talking about the 4th Qtr of a Must-Win Game 6. Will he learn from it? Probably. 

I don't see the fault people have that we are pointing out parts of the game where our players could have done better. God Forbid Skiles or Pax doing that when they show tapes of the game to Deng and everyone else on the roster. 

:worthy: Luol Deng - Impeccable, Superstar, Franchise Player on the Bulls Forum.

Everyone else - Its okay to point out your deficiencies


----------



## Kneepad (Jun 24, 2002)

darlets said:


> Deng will benefit from another season in the weight room to get STRONGER. He might bulk up alot or not, but he will get stronger after another off season.
> 
> In the play offs you have to be able to guard someone. I think Deng can stand to improve in that area some. Paxson has built a successful regular season team, now they have the work in front of them to be come a contending finals team.


I'll probably be in the minority on this, but Deng seems plenty strong to me. He has no problem finishing in the paint. He doesn't get bumped off his drives to the basket. He doesn't regularly get abused on the boards.

Seems to me that some here may be slightly overreacting to two jump hook shots that Tayshaun Prince hit over Luol at a key point in a playoff game. Prince has got to be one of the skinniest guys in the entire league. I honestly don't know how strong he is (sometimes looks can be deceiving), but the point is I don't think Prince overpowered Deng to make those shots. I think Deng, like a lot of young players in the league, needs to learn what he can and can't do defensively to stop that kind of isolation post up. In other words, it isn't a strength issue, it's a knowledge/skill issue.

Even given all that, Prince still made two great, clutch shots. I give him credit.

I'd like to see Deng work on his strength from a quickness and explosion aspect as opposed to a bulk-up aspect. More lower body work than upper body.


----------



## Bulls42 (Jul 22, 2002)

animal23-
we are on the exact same page here. we are both blasphemous.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

Bulls42 said:


> animal23-
> we are on the exact same page here. we are both blasphemous.


You aren't on the same page. Animal is talking only about his dissatisfaction with Deng in game 6. 

You said he was a series no-show, which is completely indefensible.

Interestingly, when challenged to offer a better alternative to Deng for series MVP against Detroit, no one did. And looking at the series game in and game out, in which every Bull not named Deng absolutely disappeared for two games each minimum, it would be damn near impossible to do with a straight face.

You've certainly never gone through each game and defended your argument tht Deng was a "no show in the series."

But I'd like to see you try it. I'd like to see you go through each game, analyze Deng's performance, then analyze the performance of the players you think are more deserving of series MVP on a game-by-game basis. Which would be all of the significant players I'd assume, since your opening post declares that Deng was the worst of all of them.


----------



## transplant (Jul 31, 2002)

The fact that this thread has lasted 7 pages is positively stupefying. Please God, let Luol Deng be the Bulls biggest problem!


----------



## JeremyB0001 (Nov 17, 2003)

theanimal23 said:


> I never said he was a no-show. All I said was there were crucial points of the game where he did not make the play, but the opposing player, whom was his reponsibility did.
> 
> In a Luol Deng specific thread, I called out Luol Deng. Must have been a surprise to a lot of people.
> 
> ...



I haven't seen people in this thread expressing outrage over the fact that people have pointed out that Lu was outplayed at times in game 6. I'm not sure I even see people _disagreeing_ that he was outplayed at times in game 6. Whether or not you're participating, the reason some people are upset is that an entire has been dedicated to calling Lu a no show and talking about him as though he's a disgrace when he in fact showed up more than anyone else in the series. How that's evidence that he's reached a god like state, I have no clue. I find it perfectly acceptable to critisize him but I find it more acceptable to critisize the other players that suited up for us against Detroit since they didn't play as well as Lu did.


----------

