# Hinrich's Had Enough



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

Uncharacteristically, Kirk Hinrich used strong words following Saturday's loss to Miami. "We have people who don't play their hardest," Hinrich said. 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...sbits,1,1337473.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines

Rookie Kirk Hinrich scored a career-high 29 points but left the locker room quickly without speaking to reporters.  

http://www.dailyherald.com/sports/sports_story.asp?intID=3808774

Its just another fairly direct indication that changes will have to be made. Its a shame that a rookie who normally should restrict himself to being seen and not heard, should be so demonstrable with his frustration.

If the root of the Bulls failure this season really stems from a lack of player effort more than anything else, then what choice does the organization have other than to turn over certain personnel regardless of their skill level or potential? I can't imagine that anyone wants to experience another season of underachievement like this one.

On a somewhat related issue, during the Atlanta game Bulls broadcasters Tom Dore and Red Kerr announced that Hinrich was named the CDW/HP Bulls Player of the Year. They followed their statement by pointing out that in response to the announcement Skiles commended both Hinrich and Antonio Davis for playing hard all season long. Both Dore and Kerr used Skiles' remark to imply that beyond the two named players others on the roster may have fallen short in the effort department this year.

Effort...playing hard...when these ingregients are missing all the talent in the world won't get you a win. Hopefully all the underachievers will be purged from the roster during the offseason.


----------



## rynobot (Oct 10, 2002)

All you can do is your best. Anything else is not good enough. This is not just with basketball but with everything else in life.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> Effort...playing hard...when these ingregients are missing all the talent in the world won't get you a win. Hopefully all the underachievers will be purged from the roster during the offseason.


so painfully true cblizzy. and what a shame too. on a night where kirk scored more points and had more assists than his much more heralded rookie counterparts lebron james, carmelo anthony and dwayne wade. 

http://www.nba.com/milk_rookie/ 

so to those who would say "who cares" it was a meaningless game, please spare those of us who think that trying hard and playing with effort actually does matter no matter what the record. 




> "I'm hoping they'll play like they have a sense of pride for finishing the season, that they play like they haven't already quit," Skiles said.


too late for that, with one notable exception of course.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

If only some of our other young talent had an ounce of the heart and pride that Kirk has. Darn shame.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

So, who played like a dog last night? I have my guesses.


----------



## InPaxWeTrust (Sep 16, 2002)

> So, who played like a dog last night? I have my guesses.


The usual suspects.


----------



## dsouljah9 (Jul 9, 2002)

I can understand why Hinrich's upset; I just hope that the kid's competetive spirit isn't broken and that he takes this offseason to work on his game some more as well as to forget about this horrible season.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

Now this is one for team unity. :uhoh:


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

Well, let's see. I've criticized every player on the team, the coaching staff, the Management, The Ownership, and event he fans.

I'm out of excuses. Paxson was right....no more excuses or people left to blame.

Good for Hinrich for calling them out. Hinrich is establishing himself as the team leader and he should. He is the only guy producing and giving 150% every night. 

Good point on him putting it out of his mind this off-season and working on his game. He, like every plaer on this team needs to work hard this off-season. I have faith he will.

It's a bad environment and I have finally accepted we will have to part ways with the pie that was sold to us by Krause. Should've known Krause would've sold the pie he didn't know.


----------



## texan (Jul 10, 2003)

kirk is an example of what a player should be like. he works hard and it pays off for him. i remember when i thought he was gonna be a total bust, buts he proved me and countless other people wrong. he is the true leader of this team and curry and chandler needa start listenin.


----------



## RetroDreams (Jun 9, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>IntheBlinkofaDeng</b>!
> 
> 
> The usual suspects.


Like Kirk... who was abused by career journeyman Bob Sura and Jason Terry.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> They followed their statement by pointing out that in response to the announcement Skiles commended both Hinrich and Antonio Davis for playing hard all season long.


Talk about SPIN!

The only reason they're hyping Antonio Davis is to distract us from the fact that we made a horrible trade to get Antonio Davis in the first place. And to prime us for the fact that we're stuck with him, over the hill as he is, for huge contract $$$ for a long time to come and he's likely to be a fixture on this team because nobody else out there is foolish enough to take him off our hands.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

This is some funny  

Chandler,Curry,and Crawford have been through much worse than Hinrich,Skiles have ever been .Theyve listened to all the talk about winning for years now with few real attempts from the franchise to try and do so .They watch them pull a trade and make the team worse then cut vets and NOT PLAY talented players that could help them achieve the only goal that this team should have .......which is to win .

By now anyone who was here before pax arrived wants out and I dont blame them for that .I wanna see what they are saying in 2 seasons when we are still losing and the 3c's are no longer on the club .

The truth is all the BS that Skiles and Pax are selling anyone who was on the team before this year have heard 3-4 years already but too Hinrich its all new so he believes its that way on all teams when the fact is the Bulls just suck as a organization .Its only a matter of time before hes jaded and is watching the clock .


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> Now this is one for team unity. :uhoh:


Please.

I'd rather have someone tell it how it is and be straight up than an obseqious media monkey p***y-footing around the issues with whitewashed comments and "everthing's dandy" language.

I'd be pissed if I were Kirk, too. And by this point, I might just be calling out _individuals_ as well.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>RetroDreams</b>!
> 
> 
> Like Kirk... who was abused by career journeyman Bob Sura and Jason Terry.


I'm sure Jamal Crawford and Jannero Pargo, two of the league's worst perimeter defenders, had nothing to do with that.

Also, it would have been nice if our two starting posts would have grabbed more rebounds than career journeyman Bobby Sura, but that sure as hell didn't happen.


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm sure Jamal Crawford and Jannero Pargo, two of the league's worst perimeter defenders, had nothing to do with that.
> ...


So who exactly did Kirk guard ?


----------



## curry_52 (Jul 22, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Please.
> ...


You call out individuals in the locker room, not while talking to KC Johnson or Sam Smith.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>TRUTHHURTS</b>!
> 
> 
> So who exactly did Kirk guard ?


Terry and Sura. However, I'm pretty sure he didn't guard them both at the same time the entire game.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>curry_52</b>!
> 
> 
> You call out individuals in the locker room, not while talking to KC Johnson or Sam Smith.


Been there, done that, no results. What's KC Johnson or Sam Smith gonna do, write something that hurts somebody's feelings?

I'm sick of this baby treatment. Work hard, play the game, speak truthfully and take your lumps like a man. Not a difficult way to make a few million bucks.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Terry and Sura. However, I'm pretty sure he didn't guard them both at the same time the entire game.


He didn't guard them at the same time, but many on this board believe he could.

If this were a poll......I'd be worried:

Who could stop a tornado 

___ Ditka

___ Hinrich


Too many people here would pick Hinrich....When everyone knows only Ditka can stop a Hurricane!:laugh: 

Is it lottery ball time yet?


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

Maybe it's about time Kirky looked in the mirror.

This season is a disgrace, and he is not without major fault. TJ Ford has taken worse players and put them in the playoffs. So have Wade and Bron Bron (ok, close. closer then us)

If he is the teams "best" player, then logic would dictate that he is most responsible for our record. Which BLOWS. Now of course not all the blame goes on him. But who gets the most blame for the Magics season? Tmac, thier "best" player. Why is our "best" player held to a different standard?

Yes, he plays hard night in and night out. He is a bundle of effort, and I LOVE his passion for the game.

But. (and this is a big but).

He's shooting 38%. Thats terrible for someone who shoots so many open shots. He still can't finish at the hoop. He still makes careless turnovers and poor decisions. His defense is *severly* overrated.

Yes he's a rookie, and yes he's a damn fine player. I like him and hope he's a Bull for a very long time.

But this crap about him being the only one who's trying or the only one who can "call out" other players is just that: CRAP.

Listining to certain people, be it announcers or posters, you'd think that Kirk has never made a mistake ever... in any game... in his entire life.

Truth of the matter is, he's as flawed as Jamal, Curry, Chandler or whichever the Bulls whipping boy of the month is. And it's getting really old that people are constantly holding him to a different standard then our other young players.

I'm sure some of you will consider this sacrilege, any post with any sort of critique on Lord Hinrich must be untrue and posted by a die-hard Jamal lover, perhaps his uncle or his college roomate. Instead this one is posted by a die-hard BULLS fan who's patience with double-standards is growing thin.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Maybe it's about time Kirky looked in the mirror.
> 
> This season is a disgrace, and he is not without major fault. TJ Ford has taken worse players and put them in the playoffs.


Milwaukee with Ford: 29-27, .517%
Milwaukee without Ford: 12-11, .521%

Ford: 6.5 APG, 2.56 assists per turnover
Jones: 5.7 APG, 4.49 assists per turnover



> So have Wade and Bron Bron (ok, close. closer then us)


They don't have NBDL guys in their respective lineups. They have guys like Lamar Odom, Eddie Jones, Carlos Boozer and Big Z.



> If he is the teams "best" player, then logic would dictate that he is most responsible for our record. Which BLOWS. Now of course not all the blame goes on him. But who gets the most blame for the Magics season? Tmac, thier "best" player. Why is our "best" player held to a different standard?


T-Mac doesn't get the blame for Orlando's dismal season. Look at the rest of the team and try to figure out what's missing.



> But this crap about him being the only one who's trying or the only one who can "call out" other players is just that: CRAP.


Nobody said Kirk was the only player capable or allowed to call out other players.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> Maybe it's about time Kirky looked in the mirror.
> 
> This season is a disgrace, and he is not without major fault. TJ Ford has taken worse players and put them in the playoffs. So have Wade and Bron Bron (ok, close. closer then us)
> ...


Wow this is the best post on this board in a really long time...

I don't think there's anything left to be said.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

If you think the bulls have more talent then the bucks then i think you should travel up I-94 and check out a bucks game. You can get a 10buck seat with a great view for the price.

The whole logic of "if he is sooo good he would have led us to the playoffs." is laughable. 

Im all for kirk calling out players individually, but i dont think its too hard to figure out who he is talking about now.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Milwaukee with Ford: 29-27, .517%
> ...


Keep reaching...

Watch some Bucks games or even ask some Bucks fans the impact that kid has had on their team.

They're a good team yes and they've continued to win without him, but a big reason they've been good since the beginning of the season was because Ford was their PG.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

We have KH, not TJF.

I think our records would be the same if we swapped players...neither are difference-making franchise players.

And because neither is a difference-making franchise player we can expect to find flaws in them if we insist on going over them with a fine-toothed comb as Jim Ian did.

So bravo Jim and Arenas. Now we know what improvement he needs to make for next season.  At the same time, as *the media, and his coaches, and the fans, and his rivals, and even his own teammates * have admitted---if any one player has *earned* the right to grouse about his teammates...it's him.

Frankly, I don't care anymore if both of our young bigs and Krauses "MJ" Jamal Crawford go somewhere and become superstars.

They've proven that - for whatever reasons - they *cannot* do it togather and they *cannot and/or will not* do it in a Bulls uni. We've had new coaches, and we've had new GM's. We've had young vets, old vets, vets in their prime.

There really isn't anyplace else to place the blame but on the core. If we can get Okafor, I think I'm all for deep-purging and starting over again.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Keep reaching...
> ...


If he's such an integral part to Milwaukee's success, than why doesn't he average even 30 mpg when he's healthy?

This garbage that it's Hinrich's fault is ridiculous. Yes, he's the team's best player, but a ROOKIE is not supposed to put a horrendous team on it's shoulders and take them to the playoffs. Most people agree that Hinrich should not be the #1 player on a team, he should be the John Stockton to someone else's Malone, if you will. So then why do we chastise this rookie, who's doing all he can, when he doesn't lead this team (which has been the laughingstock of the league since 99) to where they haven't been since Jordan left?

Some of you guys are a wee bit too bitter that Hinrich seems to have proven you wrong, methinks.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> His defense is *severly* overrated.


You only need to compare this to what his opposing coaches and opponents say, let alone everyone else, to see out wrong and out in left field it is.

Again, opposing coaches and opponents know more than anyone on this board.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> If he's such an integral part to Milwaukee's success, than why doesn't he average even 30 mpg when he's healthy?
> ...


good points.


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!
> TJ Ford has taken worse players and put them in the playoffs.


Michael Redd anyone?


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Thorgal</b>!
> Michael Redd anyone?


They had Redd last year and the year before that.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Some of you guys are a wee bit too bitter that Hinrich seems to have proven you wrong, methinks.



:clap:

*in a nutshell.* 

and i would take the opinions of his teammates, the coaches, the opposing coaches, the opposing players, the sportswriters, ad infinitum over those who would continue to deride hinrich's contribution to this team this year. 

it's about bringing basketball *the way it should be played* back to chicago. who can't agree with that?


----------



## Thorgal (Feb 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Jim Ian</b>!They had Redd last year and the year before that.


Oh, and Wizards had Big Ben in 1998-99 and the year before that and even in 1996-97.

Pointless...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Some of you guys are a wee bit too bitter that Hinrich seems to have proven you wrong, methinks.


Yawn...

Anything that comes from people on this board that are either...

A. From Kansas

B. From KU

C. Has a KU avatar 

I take with a grain of salt...

None of you can be objective and give honest, unbiased responses when it comes to Kirk, and that's just fact.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> None of you can be objective and give honest, unbiased responses when it comes to Kirk, and that's just fact.



Actually, that's your opinion, not a fact. 

Fact: (1) the quality of being actual. (2) something that exists or occurs. (3) a piece of information

Opinion: a belief stronger than an impression and less strong than positive knowledge


You can't immediately discredit somebody b/c they're a KU fan or live in Kansas, etc. Just use a little of your own reasoning ability and take what you want from someone else's opinion. Being automatically dismissive is pointless and unfair.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mizenkay</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Give me a break...

Has our season been so bad that you guys want to take Kirk and make him the poster child of this franchise?

Please, he's a good player and he's going to have a nice career, that being said, he still wouldn't be an integral part on most NBA teams, this year or next, he doesn't shoot that well (even though he gets a lot of wide open shots) and the one thing you guys praise him for is his defense, yet who exactly is he stopping?

I went to the Bulls-Heat game a couple weeks ago and some Miami fans were talking that that was the best D they had seen on Wade all year, yet Wade still had 21 pts and 7 assists and basically won the game for them down the stretch.

If you're a great defender you stop people..

I've seen Pietrus do it, I've seen Artest do it, I've seen Bowen do it (even though I don't like him as a player), but how many times have we seen Kirk do it?

What does it matter if you have the technique nailed, you move your feet, you keep your eyes at the middle of your man's chest, you hustle and give 110% everytime yet...

Bobby Sura can get a triple double on you? (He had 15-3-7 last time we played them)

Barbosa can light you up in his first NBA start?

Luke Ridnour can run circles round you for 10 mins then trying to guard him you hurt your ankle?

I don't give a damn anymore what you KU homers have to say in regards to my opinion, call me a JC lover, Kirk hater, fact is I don't even like the player JC is right now, and this time last year is when I thought I saw a special player, so if you want to use that as a argument, feel free to do so.

I challenge you though to instead of bashing my post, prove any of my points wrong.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> You can't immediately discredit somebody b/c they're a KU fan or live in Kansas, etc. Just use a little of your own reasoning ability and take what you want from someone else's opinion. Being automatically dismissive is pointless and unfair.


Have any of them proven they can be objective?

I'm not looking for them to turn on the kid and bash him, but the double standards are ridiculous.

If one guy can't hit ****, he's shooting too much and ball hogging, but if Kirk can't, well he's trying.

If one guy's man scores 30 on him, he sucks and doesn't play D, but if Kirk's man does, well he tried.

I'm not talking B.S., I'm going by what I see here and there are plenty of examples here to back up my stance.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Have any of them proven they can be objective?
> ...



I'm not saying that there's not bias here on the board. There's bias everywhere about lots of players and subjects. I'm just saying that just b/c someone is biased doesn't mean they're incapapble of having an opinion that might contribute something good to the board. I don't think bias automatically invalidates everything they say.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> If one guy's man scores 30 on him, he sucks and doesn't play D, but if Kirk's man does, well he tried.



This definitely happens a lot, but I don't know that I have a problem with it. I think poor performances are a lot more tolerable when you know the player gave maximum effort. All you can ask is that a guy does his best. I'd much rather watch somebody try his hardest than watch a guy with all the talent in the world fail b/c he won't give it his all. 

You may question Kirk's talent or effectiveness, but I think he's proven that he'll always give his best effort.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not saying that there's not bias here on the board. There's bias everywhere about lots of players and subjects. I'm just saying that just b/c someone is biased doesn't mean they're incapapble of having an opinion that might contribute something good to the board. I don't think bias automatically invalidates everything they say.


I respect everyone's opinions and posts as long as it doesn't get personal...

However if you look at the posts here from people that have ties to KU, or KU avatars, or anything of the sort, it's the same thing. Kirk can do no wrong in their eyes.

If that's your attitude, fine, but it does invalidate your opinion in regards to that subject.

There's a group of us here that are considered JC lovers, but we far from have the attitude that he can do no wrong.

He pissed me off when the Bulls came down here both times this year because I wanted him to lead us to a win and show the people down here he's a player, and neither time he did that.

The first game he was benched pretty quickly, and last game well he just sucked, didn't look like he had that look in his eyes that we're going to win, and I'm going to put on a show.

I think the sky's the limit for him, but he has a long way to go...

The KU kids act as if Hinrich is already there, and he himself has work to do. I'm not going to start comparing him to Jason Kidd, Gary Payton, like some people have done. Those guys are hall of famers, those comparisons are unfounded and RIDICULOUS.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> ...


I always get a kick out of these sort of counter-arguments.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I agree with what you're saying, but ultimately it's different circumstances, yet same results.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I respect everyone's opinions and posts as long as it doesn't get personal...
> ...


How many posts of mine have you seen? You're basing your premature assumptions of me based on your own jaded opinion, simply put.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I always get a kick out of these sort of counter-arguments.


I can backup what I say, you however can not...

I can find countless posts as evidence to what I'm saying...

You may not agree with it, but I'm not talking out of my ***...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> How many posts of mine have you seen? You're basing your premature assumptions of me based on your own jaded opinion, simply put.


Come on, surely you don't think you're the ONLY person here that I'm referring to do you?

Another person from this board were having this discussion earlier and that was before I had even seen your post.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Come on, surely you don't think you're the ONLY person here that I'm referring to do you?
> ...


Exactly. You're admitting that you're, essentially, stereotyping anybody and everybody that may have some tie to the University of Kansas. That's a pretty weak way to shrug off many people's opinion.....or maybe that's just me:whoknows:


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I can backup what I say, you however can not...
> ...


What exactly can you back up that I cannot?


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Give me a break...
> ...


arenas the only thing i can say to this is that you are entitled to your opinion and i am entitled to mine. i am not a "KU homer" as you say, just someone who is a fan of the bulls and of kirk's game. i've never even been to kansas!! does my avatar really bug you that much? and why shouldn't someone like kirk be the face of the franchise? is he not street enough for your sensibilities? sure sura had a triple double and barbosa had a great game against him one time. ridnour, i think you think highly of him and that is your right. i don't particularly. guess what? the world didn't just end right then when i typed that. LOL. 
and this season kirk sure did bug the **** out of no less than baron davis and stephon marbury. give ME a break. 

i think that kirk has displayed an admirable work ethic this year and he will only improve. but don't ask me. ask, for example, jeff van gundy, stan van gundy, mike fratello, doug collins, marv albert etc etc...about what they think of kirk after just one year in the league. you don't have to agree with what they say either.

it really isn't about proving someone wrong. it's about having an opinion. que sera sera.

that's the spirit. 

you can always go cheer for your clippers.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Exactly. You're admitting that you're, essentially, stereotyping anybody and everybody that may have some tie to the University of Kansas. That's a pretty weak way to shrug off many people's opinion.....or maybe that's just me:whoknows:


No, that's not what I meant...

What I'm saying is there a certain people that fit the group I'm talking about, and I'm referring to people who post on this board.

I don't know EVERYONE, so I don't know everyone's opinion, but the track record is the same for the group of people that I'm referring to here.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Yawn...
> ...


How politician...attack the person and not the ideas.

Great points Thorgal and Mizenkay.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> No, that's not what I meant...
> ...


You specifically said you take anything from someone with an affiliation to Kansas with a grain of salt, and said we cannot look at the situation objectively. That's your prerogative, but don't backpedal from your previous stance now.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> How politician...attack the person and not the ideas.
> ...


thank you GB.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

Unless it's for fun, you can leave Arenas and TruthsNotFun alone.

They're smarter than they let on, they know where KH stands in the league and on the team, and they just enjoy the denigration of said player for some perverse reason.

I really don't think they're the Jamal apologists that they sometimes come across as either.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mizenkay</b>!
> and this season kirk sure did bug the **** out of no less than baron davis and stephon marbury. give ME a break.


Baron's averaged close to 24 points - 8 assists per game against us...

Marbury close to 15 points - 10 assists in his 4 outings against us...

As far as I'm concerned no one is bugging them...

Just as no one has bugged any SF we've played against in the past month.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> You specifically said you take anything from someone with an affiliation to Kansas with a grain of salt, and said we cannot look at the situation objectively.


Up until this point that has not happened...


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

I'm not from Kansas, I'm not a homer and I quite frankly don't understand some of the pervasive attitudes around here.

Hinrich has been a good selection for the Bulls. I think he likely exceeded ALL expectations this year. He has certainly justified our pick at the #7 position in the draft. I for one was also very suprised at his defensive acumen. I think he is a very good defender contrary to some of the views held here. 

I'm not going to change anybodies mind and I'm not trying. Hinrich has embodied everything that most fans want in a Chicago Bull, which after all is how he became a fan favorite. In addition to that, he's gained the respect of players, coaches and the media. 

Hinrich is a good looking young point guard whom will probably have a damn fine NBA career. I think we ought to be pretty happy with the year he's had and I hope we see even more improvement next year.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Baron's averaged close to 24 points - 8 assists per game against us...
> ...


They really go off when KH is outta the game...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> I'm not from Kansas, I'm not a homer and I quite frankly don't understand some of the pervasive attitudes around here.
> 
> Hinrich has been a good selection for the Bulls. I think he likely exceeded ALL expectations this year. He has certainly justified our pick at the #7 position in the draft. I for one was also very suprised at his defensive acumen. I think he is a very good defender contrary to some of the views held here.
> ...


I agree with that, but the problem I have is that he can do no wrong, he's the only guy who "deserves" to be a Bull, he's the only one who gives a damn...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> They really go off when KH is outta the game...


He plays 35 MPG...

So he's not out that much.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> I'm not from Kansas, I'm not a homer and I quite frankly don't understand some of the pervasive attitudes around here.
> 
> Hinrich has been a good selection for the Bulls. I think he likely exceeded ALL expectations this year. He has certainly justified our pick at the #7 position in the draft. I for one was also very suprised at his defensive acumen. I think he is a very good defender contrary to some of the views held here.
> ...



Exactly. We got more out of this kid than anyone expected. He's not going to turn the franchise around by himself, but I sure think he was a good choice with the #7 pick. I don't know why people have to try to cut him (and his supporters) down.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Up until this point that has not happened...


Yes it has.......


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I agree with that, but the problem I have is that he can do no wrong, he's the only guy who "deserves" to be a Bull, he's the only one who gives a damn...


I agree with the last two points---i wish Curry, Chandler, and Jamal deserved to be Bulls too, and that they gave a...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Exactly. We got more out of this kid than anyone expected. He's not going to turn the franchise around by himself, but I sure think he was a good choice with the #7 pick. I don't know why people have to try to cut him (and his supporters) down.


Why do we have to cut any of our players down?

Why do we bash one guy but if KH does the same thing turn the other way?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> Yes it has.......


You want to show me when?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> He plays 35 MPG...
> ...



Maybe, but which of these possibilities is more probable?

1. Kirk Hinrich has successfully fooled the coach, GM, announcers, and fans into thinking that he is a good defender when he is in fact a poor defender.

2. Kirk Hinrich is a good defender.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The stats have to speak for themselves...

Technically he does EVERYTHING right, and he gives 110% everytime, no question but if you're man still gets 20 and 10, it doesn't matter.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Why do we have to cut any of our players down?
> ...


1. They underperform.

2. When KH underperforms, it's an exception, and almost always an external factor. It's NEVER that he came up short on the effort---like it is with the other guys.

You know this.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You want to show me when?


What's the point? You've seen all of the posts. However, you look at it from your point-of-view, and consider it to be biased tripe due to the fact that it doesn't coincide with your opinion.....


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Why do we have to cut any of our players down?
> ...



We cut them down when they do not try hard. Not giving a full effort is something that Kirk hasn't done this year, which is why you seem him being criticized less.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> 1. They underperform.
> ...


Nah, I'm not buying this...

You can't give anyone a pass for underperforming regardless...

If you're going to give excuses for one, give them for everyone, I'm sure if you look hard enough, you can find them, but that's not the point. The point is to be consistent with your evaluations, negative or positive.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> The stats have to speak for themselves...
> ...


Good defense means you're usually holding your man to his average. Great defense means you're regularly pinning him under it.

Stop cherry picking stats to boast your argument and take the season as a whole.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> What's the point? You've seen all of the posts. However, you look at it from your point-of-view, and consider it to be biased tripe due to the fact that it doesn't coincide with your opinion.....


You don't have a example so why not just come out and say that?

In the time it took for you to post that you could have found an example if it in fact has happened.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Good defense means you're usually holding your man to his average. Great defense means you're regularly pinning him under it.
> ...


A lot of people here use stats in their arguments, and I have just as right to do so.

I showed 2 players stats, but I could find a lot more.

I personally have more respect for opinions that are backed up with stats, evidence, whatever than just saying well it's this way because I say it is.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> The stats have to speak for themselves...
> ...



I tend to believe that it is still more likely that Kirk is a good defender. It would be interesting to see some sort of stat on the season of the players he's guarded and their performances compared to the average performance.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Good defense means you're usually holding your man to his average. Great defense means you're regularly pinning him under it.


My definition of good defense is stopping someone, not holding them to their average.

By your definition if I guard T-Mac and he scores 29 or whatever his average is, well I played good defense.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Nah, I'm not buying this...
> ...


Surprise, surprise.  


If KH is matched up against someone who has vastly superior physical ability to him, and yet keeps that guy to 24 and 10 instead of 40 and 10---you'd slam him?

If so, you're a putz.


Just what shooting percentage do people average against KH? It'd be interesting to see that broken down.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You don't have a example so why not just come out and say that?
> ...


I'm not going to spend the time drumming up posts you've already seen and commented on. You're not the one to avoid any post that has to do with Kirk Hinrich, thus you've seen any example I bring to the surface.

The fact of the matter is, it doesn't matter what example is brought forth. Unless it's a Kansas fan deliberately belittling Hinrich, it won't suffice for you.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> My definition of good defense is stopping someone, not holding them to their average.
> ...


Against you, yes.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> I tend to believe that it is still more likely that Kirk is a good defender. It would be interesting to see some sort of stat on the season of the players he's guarded and their performances compared to the average performance.


I believe he's a good defender as well, technically he's got it down plus he puts the effort in, my question though is who is he stopping?

If your man is getting a triple double or you're giving up 20 pts and key baskets or key plays late that lead to a win for another team, I don't know if I want to call it good or bad defense, but you're not stopping in anyone, and if KH was the defender some here try to make him out to be, that's exactly what would be happening.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> 
> 
> I'm not going to spend the time drumming up posts you've already seen and commented on. You're not the one to avoid any post that has to do with Kirk Hinrich, thus you've seen any example I bring to the surface.
> ...


My stance is pretty clear and you seem intelligent enough to understand it.

My problem is bashing one guy but giving another guy a pass for the same thing, that has always been my argument.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I believe he's a good defender as well, technically he's got it down plus he puts the effort in, my question though is who is he stopping?
> ...


You're getting a good defender and a defensive stopper confused.

No one said he was Pippen in his Prime or even Artest level---yet.

Just that he was a very good defender.

There's a difference.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Surprise, surprise.
> ...


We're not talking superior physical ability, we're talking about other guards...

It would be unfair to "grade" him on guarding guys who didn't play his position.

Mizenkay posted he bugged the hell out of Baron Davis and Starbury, so I responded.

He might have had good defensive plays on them or whatever, and I do remember that last game in NO when we lost at the buzzer he was playing some good D on Baron, and I even said if he doesn't get cheated out of the game, we win that game by 15 pts, but anyway in the end you look at the stats, plus the fact we lost the majority of those games and that speaks for itself.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> My stance is pretty clear and you seem intelligent enough to understand it.
> ...


NBA players, like your children, are not equal.

You judge them on their individual merits. If you judge them all the same you'll have the athletic one crying because he can't do what the smart one does in school, and the brainy one upset because he hasn't brought home any trophies...


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I believe he's a good defender as well, technically he's got it down plus he puts the effort in, my question though is who is he stopping?
> ...


I do believe some people go overboard on the KH praise. However, I think it's a misrepresentation to say "if your man is getting a triple double..." b/c it implies that that is what Kirk is doing. While you can point out a time here and there that Kirk got lit up, I don't think that those instances are representative of his performance over the course of the season.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> My stance is pretty clear and you seem intelligent enough to understand it.
> ...


Most other peoples' stance, in this thread anyway, is they're getting on the three C's cases for not giving full effort. Thus, in order to get on Hinrich's case, he'd have to not be giving full effort. I can't say for sure that he gives 100% every night, as I'm relegated to WGN games, however, most of the posters that populate this forum seem to be under the impression that he gives full effort game in, game out. Coincidentally that coincides quite well with the way he performed in college, so I tend to believe there's a strong possibility that they might be telling the truth.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> I do believe some people go overboard on the KH praise. However, I think it's a misrepresentation to say "if your man is getting a triple double..." b/c it implies that that is what Kirk is doing. While you can point out a time here and there that Kirk got lit up, I don't think that those instances are representative of his performance over the course of the season.


Thank you...and good night.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

Hinrich is by no means a lock down defender. He plays good defense on a team starved for defensive minded players.

If however, Hinrich's defense is so suspect, why do opposing coaches, announcers and members of the print press give him so much credit for playing good 'D'? 

What makes so many folks who earn paychecks evaluating talent, directing talent, or making comment on said talent wrong while the rest of us performing outside the field are correct? What exactly is it we know that they don't?


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> Hinrich is by no means a lock down defender. He plays good defense on a team starved for defensive minded players.
> 
> If however, Hinrich's defense is so suspect, why do opposing coaches, announcers and members of the print press give him so much credit for playing good 'D'?
> ...



It's b/c of the giant Kirk Hinirch conspiracy! Don't you know that? It's an intricately woven web of of lies and deceit designed to fool us all, and it's working!


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> If one guy can't hit ****, he's shooting too much and ball hogging, but if Kirk can't, well he's trying.


Kirk shoots within the flow of the offense. Jamal Crawford oftentimes doesn't. That's a *big* difference, believe it or not.



> If one guy's man scores 30 on him, he sucks and doesn't play D, but if Kirk's man does, well he tried.


Are arguments in your world really this simple?

P.S. Still waiting to see if Hinrich turns out to be the fifth best point guard in the '03 draft like you said over and over again a few months ago.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> However if you look at the posts here from people that have ties to KU, or KU avatars, or anything of the sort, it's the same thing. Kirk can do no wrong in their eyes.


You sound like Reinhard Heydrich at the Wannsee conference in the winter of 1942.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

*He may be overlooked off the court, but Kirk Hinrich has caught the eye of his NBA ri*

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-040410hinrich,1,2973500.story?coll=cs-bulls-headlines

Along with good news for this summer.



> "He always has been like that," says his college coach at Kansas, Roy Williams, who now is at North Carolina. "He's the most focused player I've ever coached. If you tell him he needs to work on something, he'll kill himself to work on that and then move on to the next point.


from KC Johnson



> Whether you think he's cute, a cutthroat competitor or cool under pressure, Hinrich has arrived and demands your attention.
> 
> It doesn't take a bright red shirt to see that.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

From the article:



> "He's one of the league's best defensive guards already," Miami coach Stan Van Gundy says.


I guess ol' Stan doesn't know a thing about basketball, does he, arenas?


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> From the article:
> 
> 
> ...


You guys act like I think he sucks...which I've never said, I don't even go out of my way to bash the kid.

Since JC was mentioned, I will say there are nice quotes like these as well in regards to Jamal Crawford from Rick Barry, Rick Carlisle, Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas, Ron Artest, etc. so I guess we should disregard your opinions as well because obviously they would know better than you guys right?



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> P.S. Still waiting to see if Hinrich turns out to be the fifth best point guard in the '04 draft like you said over and over again a few months ago.


Barbosa will be the best PG from this year's draft.

You can quote that, bold it, and add it to your signature and put my real name next to it.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> You guys act like I think he sucks...


No, we act like you think he's an overrated defender.



> Since JC was mentioned, I will say there are nice quotes like these as well in regards to Jamal Crawford from Rick Barry, Rick Carlisle, Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas, Ron Artest, etc. so I guess we should disregard your opinions as well because obviously they would know better than you guys right?


"Nice quotes like these" = "Crawford has the _potential_ to __________." Not "he _is_ ______________." There's a difference.





> Barbosa will be the best PG from this year's draft.
> 
> You can quote that, bold it, and add it to your signature and put my real name next to it.


This isn't a stretch statement by any means. However, this wasn't what I was getting at when I mentioned the point guards form the '03 draft class on the previous page. Nice subterfuge, though.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> Since JC was mentioned, I will say there are nice quotes like these as well in regards to Jamal Crawford from Rick Barry, Rick Carlisle, Jason Kidd, Isiah Thomas, Ron Artest, etc. so I guess we should disregard your opinions as well because obviously they would know better than you guys right?


We should keep JC separate from this discussion. This is about Kirk. I hate the one-or-the-other mentality that is prevalent here. Liking one shouldn't necessarily entail disliking the other.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> Barbosa will be the best PG from this year's draft.
> 
> You can quote that, bold it, and add it to your signature and put my real name next to it.



Maybe, but if you did say that Kirk would be the fifth best PG out of his draft class, then you're still three PGs short.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> No, we act like you think he's an overrated defender.


I don't want to be unfair and say he's bad, good, or overrated, I'm just not there yet because I think of good defense as stopping someone or making the game harder for them.

In the end of your guy has 20-10 the game wasn't that hard for him and you didn't stop him...

If you have your hand in a guy's face and he's still hitting shots, well he's just hitting shots, good offensive game doesn't necessarily mean bad defense, but when pretty consistently your man has good games, in some cases its almost like games of the year for some of these guys, I don't know how you can call a guy a great defender.



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> This isn't a stretch statement by any means. However, this wasn't what I was getting at when I mentioned the point guards form the '03 draft class on the previous page. Nice subterfuge, though.


I'm not sure what you mean here...


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>jnrjr79</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> Maybe, but if you did say that Kirk would be the fifth best PG out of his draft class, then you're still three PGs short.


We did have a whole discussion about this...

I did include Wade since his name was mentioned...

I also believe Ford, Ridnour were mentioned as well, and I do believe they will be great players as well.

So if I was three short, there you go...

Ultimately, Barbosa will be the best one...

If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but I have my beliefs as to why and I'm not trying to present it as it's going to be that way because I say it is.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> In the end of your guy has 20-10 the game wasn't that hard for him and you didn't stop him...


Again, this implies that the guys Kirk guards are putting up 20/10 against him. They are not.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't want to be unfair and say he's bad, good, or overrated, I'm just not there yet because I think of good defense as stopping someone or making the game harder for them.


Your bar appears higher than that of the pros in the game.

Like I said, he's not a lockdown defender--yet. But to say he doesn't make the game harder for the opposing guard...

:jump:


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> Barbosa will be the best PG from this year's draft.


Maybe...but we have KH and he's performing well for us now.

Didn't we get enough of the "will be" thing with Jamal?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> I'm not sure what you mean here...


I mentioned your previous posts regarding your opinion that Kirk was the fifth best point guard in the '03 draft. You countered this by ignoring the meat of said reference and went on to say how you think Barbosa is going to be the best, so on and so forth. I have no problem with your assessment of Barbosa. I think it's a hell of a lot more accurate than your assessment of Hinrich. However, I do think it's a little silly of you to at first proclaim Kirk as the fifth best point guard in the draft and then, when your proclamations are resurfaced (by me), you ignore the element pertinent to the discussion at hand (Hinrich) and instead focus on something else (Barbosa) in an effort to divert attention.

That is called subterfuge, and it's quite obvious.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

I dont put much credence into what Arenas says. He is just bitter that Kirk is clearly the better all-around player and has made jamal extremely expendable. 

Arenas did you even watch the whole Bulls=Hawk game? Kirk wasnt on Sura the whole game. He was being matched up with Terry, Sjax, sura throughout the game.


----------



## remlover (Jan 22, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> Maybe...but we have KH and he's performing well for us now.
> ...


Well said GB. With Jamal, eddy, and tyson, we have heard that these guys "could be, will be, has the potential to be" Stars. 

Its great to have a guy that already IS doing something. 

We dont have to hear excuses like "well jamal barely played any organized ball in HIgh School, and when he went to Michigan he only played 17 games. So, basically jamal is just like a high school player and he needs time to grow." This is from this season when jamal is in his 4th year!


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>remlover</b>!
> I dont put much credence into what Arenas says. He is just bitter that Kirk is clearly the better all-around player and has made jamal extremely expendable.
> 
> Arenas did you even watch the whole Bulls=Hawk game? Kirk wasnt on Sura the whole game. He was being matched up with Terry, Sjax, sura throughout the game.


Terry 23 points 11 assists
Jackson 36 points
Sura 12 points 12 assists 11 rebounds

Good point Remlover.

I don't put much credence into what you say because most of the time you're wrong, good try making this about JC, really though I could care less.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> I mentioned your previous posts regarding your opinion that Kirk was the fifth best point guard in the '03 draft. You countered this by ignoring the meat of said reference and went on to say how you think Barbosa is going to be the best, so on and so forth. I have no problem with your assessment of Barbosa. I think it's a hell of a lot more accurate than your assessment of Hinrich. However, I do think it's a little silly of you to at first proclaim Kirk as the fifth best point guard in the draft and then, when your proclamations are resurfaced (by me), you ignore the element pertinent to the discussion at hand (Hinrich) and instead focus on something else (Barbosa) in an effort to divert attention.
> ...


lol...

Come on VV, I'm not THAT smart...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Nah, I'm not buying this...
> ...


I think that was the whole point GB was making.

What is "consistent"? It's the rule to which there are exceptions. As a rule, Hinrich has been a pretty good defender, but there are exceptions.

As a rule, most of the other guys on this team have been crappy defenders, though on exceptional occasions they have played good defense.

------------------

Regarding Kirk in general, I can only say that if he's been in any way disappointing then guys like Curry, Crawford, Chandler, and Pippen have been complete and utter flops. 

Regardless of whether they're coming along "fast enough", one thing I look for is whether it looks like there are problems that will lead a young player to not develop to his fullest. With Curry its his desire. With Chandler it's his frail body. With Crawford... I don't even want to go down that road. But the point is, there's a roadblock in all those cases to the player achieving what I think they ought to be able to achieve.

With Kirk, the only factor I see is time. Given time, he'll continue to improve from his already impressive quality. The other guys need time too, of course, but they have additional roadblocks to overcome.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

I can't blame Kirky for doing his job. I get mad at the corporation (Bulls) Kirk works for, the corporation that cuts down trees (talent). Kirk just happens to be the construction worker cutting down the trees for this corporation and the person we most directly see carrying out this work and the one it seems I might protest against. But no, I'm mad at the corporation.

But here is how Kirk is cutting down the trees (talent). I think something essential to the continuing maturation of this team was unity. You know, "in things essential, unity." And basically, his presence hasn't helped team unity. 

On the court, I can't see anything that Kirk has added to this team. It's not a knock on Kirk's character or anything, but sometimes you have a piece that just doesn't fit. Kirk just didn't fit this particular team so well, the way it was constructed and supposed to be playing under Jerry K --- young offensively explosive team that needed another shooter and/or defender. Furthermore, John solidifed that Kirk was going to be the point guard of this team for the future which probably once again unsettled Jamal.

The trade helped prevent this offensive explosion from ever getting on track. The two leading scorers of last season gone replaced by an aging power forward and another power forward, both with no scoring skills. Scoring to be carried out by Jamal Crawford and Eddy Curry, two parts, but not all the parts of last season's strong finish. 

Not only that, but a new coach with a defensive mind.

So we thought we got better on defense, when our problems were our offense.

High expectations still squarely on the pencil-thin and pudgy shoulders of Jamal and Eddy to carry this team. Plenty of "close" games, but we barely collect wins. 

Up to this point in my post it's all been the corporations' damage. The in-team problems multiply, but Kirk is devoid of those problems because he's a rookie trying to prove he can play improves by the minute. Just when everyone thought he was going to bust out. Kirk is the only one legitimizing what the corporation does by playing well and makes everyone else on the team look bad. Can't blame him, he's just trying to prove his worth.

However, the team sucks. I have seen barely any traces of that young decent chemistry that was developing between Eddy and Jamsypoo last year when we were winning meaningless games. I see them get the ball but their offense doesn't flow at all. They get their shots, but it's out of sync. Why ?

'Cause Kirk the point guard plays point guard ball now. He's done so well as a rookie that he gets to start. He's definitely earned it. 

Now it looks like he's been told to lead. But being in the game more than anyone else ? Taking wide open last shots and completely missing them ? Kirk nowadays racks up assists, but he also dominates the ball; doesn't always get everyone involved on offense. There will be plenty of possessions where Jamal doesn't even touch the ball (it's like he's in there not to screw up, yet again). There's no real chemistry, not even in these meaningless games. Kirk's defense is decent, but it's pretty useless when you can't score. He plays a position that that really doesn't shut down the team's most versatile player. 

Scotty isolates players here on-court. Kirk's just carrying out what Scott's plan is.

But offcourt still he gets praise and recognition from Skiles, Bulls.com, etc.. This all has the effect of dividing the team between "Kirk" and "others" when he has not clearly carried the Bulls to any wins this season. 

More team division by Skiles.

I think this division has turned off Eddy, Jamsypoo, etc. They have not felt the ease of the game with them under Scott and his division-making. And the confidence has gone down trickling down all the way to effort. And the more games have been played, the worse it has looked for the rest of the guys.

Kirk's actual impact on the team is blinded because he surpassed expectations. He's been great as an individual player, but not great for uniting this team. That hasn't been his fault, it's been the corporation's. The corporation in question throughout this post, Skiles and Paxson, completely unknowing of what Jerry wanted to do, have made it so that these veteran players would have to fit around Kirk because he's surpassed these enthusiastically surpassed these expectations. And now it looks like that's what we have to deal with this summer, fitting players around Kirk, when he hasn't proved that he is a player to build around.


----------



## Jim Ian (Aug 6, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> I can't blame Kirky for doing his job. I get mad at the corporation (Bulls) Kirk works for, the corporation that cuts down trees (talent). Kirk just happens to be the construction worker cutting down the trees for this corporation and the person we most directly see carrying out this work and the one it seems I might protest against. But no, I'm mad at the corporation.
> 
> But here is how Kirk is cutting down the trees (talent). I think something essential to the continuing maturation of this team was unity. You know, "in things essential, unity." And basically, his presence hasn't helped team unity.
> ...


Wow. 

Thats a pretty amazing post kids. 
Read it twice if you must....


----------



## TRUTHHURTS (Mar 1, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> I can't blame Kirky for doing his job. I get mad at the corporation (Bulls) Kirk works for, the corporation that cuts down trees (talent). Kirk just happens to be the construction worker cutting down the trees for this corporation and the person we most directly see carrying out this work and the one it seems I might protest against. But no, I'm mad at the corporation.
> 
> But here is how Kirk is cutting down the trees (talent). I think something essential to the continuing maturation of this team was unity. You know, "in things essential, unity." And basically, his presence hasn't helped team unity.
> ...


Holy  


:allhail:


----------



## JT (Mar 1, 2004)

My opinions are on the matter, Hinrich in 1-3 years will make the all-defense team playing the way he is now, the kid can play some D. Problem is, when hes on defense its usually 1 on 5 for him. 

There's no help defense on that team at ALL which is integral to ANY defensive effort. It's not supposed to be one-on-one out there, that's why there are four other people with you.

When I saw him play last, he was visibly giving Starbury trouble which who is one the most explosive in the league. Then Pargo switched off onto Starbury, and he immediately went off for 4 straight points. Revelations here? I think not.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> I can't blame Kirky for doing his job. I get mad at the corporation (Bulls) Kirk works for, the corporation that cuts down trees (talent). Kirk just happens to be the construction worker cutting down the trees for this corporation and the person we most directly see carrying out this work and the one it seems I might protest against. But no, I'm mad at the corporation.
> 
> But here is how Kirk is cutting down the trees (talent). I think something essential to the continuing maturation of this team was unity. You know, "in things essential, unity." And basically, his presence hasn't helped team unity.
> ...


Wow, that is absolutely INCREDIBLE.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

*"He's one of the league's best defensive guards already," Miami coach Stan Van Gundy says.* 

http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...inrich,1,2973500.story?coll=cs-home-headlines

No ulterior motives at work here from what I can tell. Van Gundy's talking about a player who's under contract to the Bulls for four more years. Van Gundy knows that just like his prize rookie Dwayne Wade, Hinrich won't be changing his NBA address for quite some time. My point is that we've all occasionally viewed situations where a coach of one team pays homage to a player from another team only to realize that the player's contract will soon expire. One could interpret those kinds of kudos as little more than more than an attempt to seduce the prospective free agent to be.

But like I said before, Van Gundy has absolutely no reason to go out of his way to pay this type of homage to an opposing player other than to acknowledge what he considers an outstanding performer in an area of the game that's clearly important to him...in this case, defense.

"He's one of the league's best defensive guards already," Miami coach Stan Van Gundy says. No attempts by the Miami coach to qualify or conditionalize his observations...just a straightforward personal opinion expressed by someone whose livlihood depends on his ability to evaluate players. And being shown that kind of unsolicited respect from a qualified individual who has nothing to gain personally by doing so makes Hinrich's frustration with a number of his teammates a little more worthy of notice than if it had come from someone like, lets say, Eddie Robinson perhaps...or Eddy Curry...or Jamal Crawford...Marcus Fizer...Kendall Gill...Jerome Williams...etc, etc, etc.


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> *"He's one of the league's best defensive guards already," Miami coach Stan Van Gundy says.*
> 
> http://chicagosports.chicagotribune...inrich,1,2973500.story?coll=cs-home-headlines
> ...


Jefferson scored 17 points, Kerry Kittles netted 13 and Kidd had 11 and 12 assists. But the quickness of Crawford was a problem all night for Kidd, who had six of the Nets' 20 turnovers. "The sky's the limit for Jamal," Kidd said. "I told him to keep working at his game. It's just a matter of time and getting the experience out on the court." 

*''[Jamal] Crawford could have come in there and gotten things going,'' said former Bull Ron Artest, now an All-Star with the Pacers. ''So that was good [that he didn't] because we needed the victory. It was good to get [win] 51. *

Shaq even said Eddy was going to be the next Shaquille O'Neal (can't find the quote right now)

I don't want to go overboard with the quotes...

My point here is some of you are putting so much credence to these quotes, but some of our other "bums" are just as touted as Kirk is. I almost as if you guys are bringing up those quotes to say well Van Gundy said this so it's law or it must be true. Ok well coming from a coach it speaks volumes, then we have a quote from a player saying he was glad a guy wasn't out there because they had a better chance of winning, does that speak volumes too?

If a coach or a player says something does that mean our opinions are nothing because well a coach or player feels this way?

No one says Kirk sucks, and we know he's valuable around the league. He's probably our most tradeable asset.

However, I believe the franchise has decided to make this kid the poster child of this organization, and well, that's a problem. At this board and within the organization he is placed above the team in a sense...

I think ElDrumhai basically says Kirk is not a difference maker, and on this team, he isn't, now we have to go find 11 more Hinrichs and we're set or or would we be a team that gives maximum effort but ultimately comes up short?


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Jefferson scored 17 points, Kerry Kittles netted 13 and Kidd had 11 and 12 assists. But the quickness of Crawford was a problem all night for Kidd, who had six of the Nets' 20 turnovers. "The sky's the limit for Jamal," Kidd said. "I told him to keep working at his game. It's just a matter of time and getting the experience out on the court."
> ...


You forget one very important fact...so significant in fact that I can only conclude that you ommited it because of your bias and your determination to diminish KH's well-earned reputation throughout the league: Kirk has had a bobblehead night and JC hasn't. I'm prepared to ignore everyone's statements and rest my case one the one, undeniable fact. So lets see you try to top that with your reams of statistics and slanted observations!


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> You forget one very important fact...so significant in fact that I can only conclude that you ommited it because of your bias and your determination to diminish KH's well-earned reputation throughout the league: Kirk has had a bobblehead night and JC hasn't. I'm prepared to ignore everyone's statements and rest my case one the one, undeniable fact. So lets see you try to top that with your reams of statistics and slanted observations!


this _has_ to be the reason. what else could it be? i just read through eldrummys post three times, and am well aware of arena's personal bias against kirk, and i am still completely and utterly dumbfounded. but hey, ya got one thing right - kirk does make the play of the others look bad. he has exposed them and you guys don't like that one bit. boo hoo. 

kirk is cutting down the "trees" on behalf of the corporation? kirk doesn't "fit" on a team of selfish primadonnas seemingly only concerned with their individual stat lines? 
guys who don't know what the word consistency even means? whoa. stunned! 

please someone call up Michael Jordan and let's ask him what he thinks about Kirk Hinrich and his play for the bulls this year..we could start by saying hey guess what MJ, Kirk just broke your record for rookie assists. I mean is that what you need to hear? and if he thinks Kirk is bad for the team then i will shut the **** up. forever.

so let's see...we have the word of a ron artest on jamal crawford over the word of either of the van gundy brothers on kirk. who you gonna think is more credible around the league. you guys just need to get over yourselves. kirk is here to stay. he is the face of the franchise. he is the bobblehead that fans clammor for. unbelievable. 

and just for the record, listen to what antonio davis has to say:



> Former Raptor Antonio Davis was booed every time he touched the ball when the Bulls visited Toronto on March 19.
> 
> Davis can expect more of the same after calmly questioning the commitment of Vince Carter on Saturday.
> 
> ...



The Chicago Tribune


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> You forget one very important fact...so significant in fact that I can only conclude that you ommited it because of your bias and your determination to diminish KH's well-earned reputation throughout the league: Kirk has had a bobblehead night and JC hasn't. I'm prepared to ignore everyone's statements and rest my case one the one, undeniable fact. So lets see you try to top that with your reams of statistics and slanted observations!


Actually, I thought the one very important fact is that Hinrich is being praised for his play NOW. The other two quotes mentioned were praise of what someone may become --- the skys the limit; the next Shaq. After six years of waiting, I'll take what I can get NOW.


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

Actually, the bobblehead doll is real consolation.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> "Taking a shower, making sure you're taped, just everyday things. It may be a little thing that you didn't take a shower [after practice]. But in some way during the time you're on the floor, that comes out in your play because it's a lack of professionalism."


Did anyone else find it a little disconcerting that AD is taking note of who showers and who doesn't? Last thing I want to think of when I'm watching a game is which guys are shower buddies. Anybody wonder if thats the _real_ reason he wants to bring in *his* guys? :laugh:


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> 
> 
> Actually, I thought the one very important fact is that Hinrich is being praised for his play NOW. The other two quotes mentioned were praise of what someone may become --- the skys the limit; the next Shaq. After six years of waiting, I'll take what I can get NOW.


Bingo.

And mizenkay, that's a great post.


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>mizenkay</b>!
> 
> 
> this _has_ to be the reason. what else could it be? i just read through eldrummys post three times, and am well aware of arena's personal bias against kirk, and i am still completely and utterly dumbfounded. but hey, ya got one thing right - kirk does make the play of the others look bad. he has exposed them and you guys don't like that one bit. boo hoo.
> ...


So you're not even going to try and say that he hasn't made them look bad ? So in effect you acknowledge that he's divided, rather than united the team ? How does that prove he's been a leader ? I'm sorry I always thought leaders were supposed to bring the team together. 

Your statement reaffirms that he was a bad fit for this team at this stage of development, let alone the leader that you think he is. Again, not a knock on Kirk the individual, who with more experience and a better shot could prove that he is THE franchise point guard. I didn't say that he will always and forever be a bad fit, but he was for the team that we had and were supposed to develop. He may be a great leader, but only with a different make-up of this team. And this is where I get p'd off at Pax and Skiles.

Now it appears the team now has to fit around him, in effect blinding that he was ever a bad fit for this team. It appears, that they're basically going to rely on a different make-up of a team rather than actually getting the BEST out of the current guys. It seems like they are sitting around desiring a different core altogether when it looked like we already had a core.

I think of Pax and Skiles doings/undoings as us already being at 9,000 (not really a great score but at least close to getting the extra life at 10,000) points in Pac-Man, and then Pax and Skiles coming in and resetting the damn game.

Basically, I'm p'd at Pax and Skiles for not helping the talent get on its feet (But I'd probably be most p'd at Reinsdorf) And now were set to lose this talent without knowing what were getting in return. And we'll be no better than we were 6 years ago.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> 
> Again, not a knock on Kirk the individual, who with more experience and a better shot could prove that he is THE franchise point guard.


Imagine Kidd when he gets a better shot!

Hinrich 

fg% .387 
3fg% .392

Kidd

fg% .384
3fg% .313


----------



## The 6ft Hurdle (Jan 25, 2003)

Except that Kirk doesn't quite rebound, steal, or even get as many assists as Jason. Because of that, Kirk's game is more dependent on the shot.


----------



## mizenkay (Dec 29, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> 
> So you're not even going to try and say that he hasn't made them look bad ? So in effect you acknowledge that he's divided, rather than united the team ? How does that prove he's been a leader ? I'm sorry I always thought leaders were supposed to bring the team together.
> 
> ...


i guess we will have to agree to disagree. 

i just don't see how kirk has caused this big rift in team unity that you and others imagine. 

he is just trying to be accountable. trying to be a professional. trying to be the best team player that he can be. _at least this is what i see when i watch the games._ if his shot isn't falling he more often than not finds another way to contribute. 

so the bottom line for me is: i see a rookie who more often than not has tried to elevate the level of play with his hustle, ability and his smarts. this unfortunately has not always translated in wins. after all there are four other guys on the floor with him. and why then do his teammates praise him as they do?... 

as i write this we just won in overtime vs. the raptors. jamal scored an AMAZING 50 points to lead the bulls and while kirk didn't have _quite_ that scoring output - he did post 10 assists - many of which were to jamal. and the best part? THEY ACTUALLY WON!!

i think kirk is a great fit for the bulls. i think you may be more distressed that pax and skiles discontinued the practice of coddling and stroking the fragile egos of "the youngsters" in an effort to improve the overall professionalism of the players and the quality of the play of THE TEAM in general. 

i don't know. i really don't. maybe the way kirk plays isn't the flashiest or capable of generating the most wowza sportcenter highlights. but 22,000+ can't be wrong when they cheer for him the loudest during the player intros at the UC. i guess they are affecting team unity too. don't want to hurt anyones precious feelings afterall. should we tell them to be quiet?

this is not a video game.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Maybe Hinrich's postgame comments from the other night sparked something in Jamal today.....


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> You forget one very important fact...so significant in fact that I can only conclude that you ommited it because of your bias and your determination to diminish KH's well-earned reputation throughout the league: Kirk has had a bobblehead night and JC hasn't. I'm prepared to ignore everyone's statements and rest my case one the one, undeniable fact. So lets see you try to top that with your reams of statistics and slanted observations!


:laugh: 

Some people can't think much for themselves...


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> Maybe Hinrich's postgame comments from the other night sparked something in Jamal today.....


I think so 

I think its safe to say that you can put an asterix to Jamal's bi-line tonight with a cross reference to Kirk Hinrich


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> I think so
> ...


Are we serious?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> 
> So you're not even going to try and say that he hasn't made them look bad ? So in effect you acknowledge that he's divided, rather than united the team ? How does that prove he's been a leader ? I'm sorry I always thought leaders were supposed to bring the team together.


It's an absurd thought. If these guys didn't follow his lead, it was that they didn't want to follow. 

KH hasn't had anything to do with the poor professionalism of the other players.

He didn't make Jamal a jack-o-matic bad shot machine the middle third of the season.

He didn't make Eddy softer than a twinkie.

He didnt whack Tyson in the back.


----------



## Zach (May 11, 2003)

He can come to Dallas. Kirk has emerged as the team's leader and I like that for him being a rookie. The Bulls needed a leader really bad.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Are we serious?


Deadly


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>GB</b>!
> 
> 
> It's an absurd thought. If these guys didn't follow his lead, it was that they didn't want to follow.
> ...


Ya, but now we're saying the reason JC had a huge game today was because of KH's comments?

Oh ok...

So give KH the credit when he makes comments and guys step up, but not when they step down?

Got it.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> I think so
> ...


Yep...thats what I'm thinking.

Why can't that motivation come from withiin?


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Ya, but now we're saying the reason JC had a huge game today was because of KH's comments?
> ...


See my comment about their motivation above.

I have a feeling lots of ugly things will be said by JC if JC leaves the Bulls and signs elsewhere.


----------



## chifaninca (May 28, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> I think so
> ...


FJ - Please tell me someone as smart as you was joking around.

Hinrich only gets credit for another up and down no offese producing game. Assists...hell, Paul Shirley could've gotten assists dishing the ball to Jamal today.

Kirk's words are that important? Please. I applauded the kid for speaking his mind and trying to establish himself as a leader - the same thing most here bashed Jay Williams and Jamal and Eddy and Tyson for doing. To give him credit for anything other than stating the obvious is rediculous.

Kirk is a very flawed player. the same as the rest of this Bulls team.

I think Kirk's a stand up guy and will work his arse off to get better in the off-season. I'm also hoping he cuts the laws for the refs this summer so he won't get so many cheap fouls.

Jamal scored 50 and did it on better than 50% shooting from the outside! He did it and carried the team to an OT victory. 

Damn.....Is John Paxson and Scott Skiles inhabiting the bodies of you guys! Retro check IP's....The insanity must stop.

We are a team REBUILDING for the SIXTH consecutive season!!!!!!!

Any bright moments should be celebrated - NOT TORN DOWN!

What did Kirk have to say after today's game?

If he was a psoter ont his board ---->
(Note the sarcasm) - "The ref's are meanies and took me out of my game. I pouted and shot 2 for 11. Still, I did my job. Glad to see Jamal listened to me. It was also great to see that Toronto let him play by himself. I feel responsible for Jamal's good day"

Real life Kirk who has the capacity to root for the team and not one player ----->
Probably more like this:
"Every win counts. I had an average day, but it was great to see my TEAMMATES play well. We won with some outstanding efforts and good team efforts".


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> Deadly


I'm not buying that...

GB just made the argument for me so you can read his post...

Plus let's not forget before this game in the previous 3 contests against the Raps JC averaged 19 pts. and 5 assts. and he led us to victories in 2 of those 3 games, the 3rd game he didn't really show up and Kirk paced us.

Anyway point is, he plays well against the Raps, just like he plays good against New Orleans, Orlando, and some other teams.

I think it's a stretch to come out and say KH's comments are the reason JC had the game he had today, Kirk didn't have a lights out game today so let's not look for some other area to give him credit in since we can't do it with the stats.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> 
> GB just made the argument for me so you can read his post...


Read again, or ask for some clarificaton...cuz you got it all wrong.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>chifaninca</b>!
> 
> 
> Kirk's words are that important?


Who knows. Some here say they are, thus the rift he's supposedly created within the team. Others, such as yourself, feel they aren't. I say consult the magic 8 ball and have another hit from the bowl.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

Without seeing the game I'd say Jamal had an amazing game just looking at the stat line. Motivated by KH? Doubt it. Matter of fact, no chance. Motivated by playing Rose and the Raptors? Motivated by the Raptors saying the Bulls were the worst in the league during the season? Thats my bet. Same goes for New Orleans (Floyd), Seattle (hometown). It doesn't always work - see Knicks. When Jamal plays with his own motivation he usually plays pretty darn well. Wish I could have seen the game today.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

E L D R U H M A I,

Your whole argument, while nicely thought out and presented, is saying that everyone else would somehow be better without Kirk here?

You gotta be freaking kidding me. Kirk has made these guys look bad because by and large they've been bad. That doesn't mean they can't get better, but making Hinrich the scapegoat for everyone elses' failures is just silly?

Looking at where this team was going... if we'd drafted someone else... say Hayes or Pietrus, I don't think we would have been any better.


----------



## GB (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> Without seeing the game I'd say Jamal had an amazing game just looking at the stat line. Motivated by KH? Doubt it. Matter of fact, no chance. Motivated by playing Rose and the Raptors? Motivated by the Raptors saying the Bulls were the worst in the league during the season? Thats my bet. Same goes for New Orleans (Floyd), Seattle (hometown). It doesn't always work - see Knicks. When Jamal plays with his own motivation he usually plays pretty darn well. Wish I could have seen the game today.


Hmmm...Rose and co...yeah that too.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> E L D R U H M A I,
> 
> Your whole argument, while nicely thought out and presented, is saying that everyone else would somehow be better without Kirk here?
> ...


Ditto TJ Ford. 

ELDRUHMAI certainly gets points for going to great lengths and against all odds to make a point Hinrich is a misfit on this team though and to that I certainly agree. Hopefully he won't appear to be quite the misfit next year.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> 
> 
> I think so
> ...


Yeah that makes sense, but I hope other posters (and you) don't mean that Kirk is totally responsible for Jamal's offensive explosion. He definitely played a role in the output, as a good number of his ten assists went to setting-up Jamal, and I'm sure his comments motivated him as well. But it's not like this is a rare occasion when someone plays well due to another player.

Whenever Kirk plays well he owes some credit to Jamal and Eddy for drawing some of the attention, and it goes the same way for all of them. They play well as a result of the actions of others.


----------



## Benny the Bull (Jul 25, 2002)

My thinking is Jamal played well because of Jamal.

Just the same that when Jamal played badly it's because of Jamal.

May be simplistic, and others factors are involved, but when you have a good game, it's mostly because of you.


----------



## 2cool4skool (Mar 30, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>E L D R U H M A I</b>!
> I can't blame Kirky for doing his job. I get mad at the corporation (Bulls) Kirk works for, the corporation that cuts down trees (talent). Kirk just happens to be the construction worker cutting down the trees for this corporation and the person we most directly see carrying out this work and the one it seems I might protest against. But no, I'm mad at the corporation.
> 
> But here is how Kirk is cutting down the trees (talent). I think something essential to the continuing maturation of this team was unity. You know, "in things essential, unity." And basically, his presence hasn't helped team unity.
> ...


"But offcourt still he gets praise and recognition from Skiles, Bulls.com, etc.. This all has the effect of dividing the team between "Kirk" and "others" when he has not clearly carried the Bulls to any wins this season."

This is the paragraph that got me. Of course Hinrich hasn't carried the team to any wins. He has a MUCH worse team around him. Our line-up for the end of last season. . .

PG - Williams/ Crawford
SG - Rose
SF - Marshall/ Hassell
PF - Chandler/ Fizer
C - Curry

And this season. . .

PG - Hinrich/ Pargo
SG - Crawford/ Gill
SF - Johnson
PF - Davis/ Williams
C - Curry

Hmmm. . . I wonder why this team is so down. Our 2 best players were traded away, Chandler's been injured, Fizer's been injured, Pippen's been injured. We're going backwards and it has nothing to do, directly or indirectly, with Kirk.


----------



## FJ_of _Rockaway (May 28, 2002)

PEOPLE !

Wake up and stop taking everything so emotively and so goddamn seriously !!

What has happened to everyone's capacity to have a laugh

This isn't life and death


----------



## arenas809 (Feb 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Mikedc</b>!
> Looking at where this team was going... if we'd drafted someone else... say Hayes or Pietrus, I don't think we would have been any better.


Definitely wouldn't have been any worse...


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>FJ_of _Rockaway</b>!
> PEOPLE !
> 
> Wake up and stop taking everything so emotively and so goddamn seriously !!
> ...


Amen.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>deranged40</b>!
> 
> 
> Yeah that makes sense, but I hope other posters (and you) don't mean that Kirk is totally responsible for Jamal's offensive explosion. He definitely played a role in the output, as a good number of his ten assists went to setting-up Jamal, and I'm sure his comments motivated him as well. But it's not like this is a rare occasion when someone plays well due to another player.
> ...


Absolutely and if they could all play TEAM ball more often they would ALL win more often! Ah, if only they would understand that.


----------



## Mr. T (Jan 29, 2004)

> Originally posted by <b>arenas809</b>!
> 
> 
> Definitely wouldn't have been any worse...


Agreed. At this point the Chicago Bulls have NO - ZERO - NADA - ZILCH difference makers.


----------



## deranged40 (Jul 18, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>No Excuses; No Vision</b>!
> 
> 
> Absolutely and if they could all play TEAM ball more often they would ALL win more often! Ah, if only they would understand that.


If only the board would understand it, as well. Everything around here turns into a Kirk vs. Jamal thread. I'm a bigger fan of Kirk than I am Jamal, but both are good players and they could easily play TOGETHER and make a formidable backcourt, why have one or the other when you could have both.


----------

