# JC vs. KH



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

I know we've seen this enough , but there is something i noticed because of reading game threads over the lasst week.

Kirk is selfish , It may sounds strange considering he had 11 assists yesterday but yes it is true.

my proof , for fun i decided to count how many passes kirk threw to jamal last night , i figured it would be something to do in the 1st quarter and i would soon stop ...until the end of the 1st quarter and I noticed kirk had passed the ball to crawford 1 time in 12 minutes of play 

1 friggin' time in a quarter in which crawford went 5-6 for 12 points (in case anyone wanted to know it was a bailout pass in which kirk drove into the middle of the lane and pitched it outfor a JC 3 pter)

if you are a pg its goes without saying that you will feed the hot hand , but kirk didn't . for the game because i was shocked at that number i kept count and at the end of it all the number of times kirk had passed the ball to jamal crawford on a career night was an incredible 6

thats it 6 times did the ball leave kirks hands and travel through the air and went in crawford's direction.

which very much feeds my belief that kirk is not a pg or at least a true one in any sense of the word 

what kind of point guard can play 45 minutes and only have the ball leave his hands to the other guard on his team ...who played 42 minutes only a half a dozen times in the best game a bull player has has since 1998?

any thoughts?


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

I can't agree.

Kirk must be one hell of a PG to get 11 assists on a night that he only passed 6 times to a guy that scored 42% of a team's points.


----------



## kcchiefs-fan (Oct 28, 2002)

Hinrich is extremely far from being a selfish player. However, it's very possible that he and Crawford simply don't like each other. You'll notice Crawford hardly ever passes it Kirk's way either. If this is the case, than it either needs to be remedied or the Bulls need to decide who is more important to their future, and ship the other one out. You can't have a solid backcourt if the two guards don't have any chemistry.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>kcchiefs-fan</b>!
> Hinrich is extremely far from being a selfish player. However, it's very possible that he and Crawford simply don't like each other. You'll notice Crawford hardly ever passes it Kirk's way either. If this is the case, than it either needs to be remedied or the Bulls need to decide who is more important to their future, and ship the other one out. You can't have a solid backcourt if the two guards don't have any chemistry.


actually crawford passed it to kirk 12 times last night ...i thought the same thing that maybe it was mutual but on the court it doesn't appear so


----------



## johnston797 (May 29, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> actually crawford passed it to kirk 12 times last night ...i thought the same thing that maybe it was mutual but on the court it doesn't appear so


A one game sample size is insufficent for this type of conclusion.

Keep counting for awhile and let us know how it turns out.


----------



## truebluefan (May 27, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> actually crawford passed it to kirk 12 times last night ...i thought the same thing that maybe it was mutual but on the court it doesn't appear so


JC passed the ball to kirk because kirk is the pg. Kirk has 3 other guys to pass to. Have you ever thought maybe kirk is not suppose to pass the ball to jamal to START the offense, even though Jamal may be the end result of it? Kirk could just being doing what he is told to do.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

i dont think kirk is selfish, but he tends to *'fish for assists'*. he tends to feed gill and blount more because those guys are our most consistant stop and pop shooters.. meaning they give kirk the best chance for an assists. i dont think kirk is neccesarily selfish for 'fishing for assists', he preferrs passing to blount and gill over Jc because although Jc is the best scorer on the active roster.. he dosent give kirk the best chance for that dime based on the simple fact that Jc needs that extra dribble and step before he takes his jumpers.. that dosent give kirk the assists he wants.

is it selfish? i wouldnt say so, but he needs to feed the hothand regardless of whether that hothand is a guy that needs that extra step and dribble

kirk also tends to pass up the easy wide open shots to guys who can get him quick dimes, he needs to be more aggresive with his jumper


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

I think that getting the ball to Crawford is probably Kirk's biggest fault as a PG right now. He is not a selfish player in general, but last night I noticed that he really wasn't getting the ball to Crawford as much as he should have- hence Kendall Gill's 14 field goal attempts despite the fact that he only made 3 shots. I don't know if Kirk has some kind of grudge against Crawford or if that's just the way the game went, but that's one part of Kirk's game that needs to change.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

good job feeding into my paranoia. As far as saying this is a one game phenomenea, people who have been following the board know that I pointed this strange anomaly out several games ago.

The most reasonable explanation is vincent vega's about how Kirk doesn't have the confidence yet to freelance on offense, so thus he won't break a play to feed the hot hand, and that the real problem here is that Gill is taking an unhealthy amount of shots instead of making the extra pass to Crawford.

But it is certainly a very intriguing thing. I find it almost impossible to believe that Kirk would be so immature as to let his personal feelings about Jamal affect the team out on the court. And I also find it hard to believe that he could have animosity towards Jamal, given how well liked Jamal is by all of his teammates. Jamal seems like a hard guy to not like off the court.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

can we lock this thread? This argument has been only gone over in about 2 out of 3 outstanding threads


----------



## rainman (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> JC passed the ball to kirk because kirk is the pg. Kirk has 3 other guys to pass to. Have you ever thought maybe kirk is not suppose to pass the ball to jamal to START the offense, even though Jamal may be the end result of it? Kirk could just being doing what he is told to do.


finally a sober comment on this subject, thank you.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> JC passed the ball to kirk because kirk is the pg. Kirk has 3 other guys to pass to. Have you ever thought maybe kirk is not suppose to pass the ball to jamal to START the offense, even though Jamal may be the end result of it? Kirk could just being doing what he is told to do.


as far as initiating the offense it was about even last night in how many times each player did it (jc and KH something i've been saying all week the bulls need to do more) so i'm not sure thats the case because kirk pretty much ran the team in the 1st quarter but as the game went on JC ran the team more and more ...but JC still passed the ball to kirk at the same rate so if as their roles changed the amount of passing between them didn't

when kirk ran the offense it was mostly a set when gill and craword ran around baseline screens and popped out at opposite sides at the same time 

they might have run it about 12 -15 times only once did kirk even look to crawford's side and considering the night crawford was having it seems odd as JC usually had to go around in a complete circle and go over to gill in order to recieve the ball .

it wasn't like there were screens up at the top so JC was actually more open then and was guarded by the time he got the ball.


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

I don't see any reason to lock it. This thread brings up a legitimate, original point about Kirk's PG abilities and this is a separate discussion from the other threads.


----------



## rlucas4257 (Jun 1, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>Louie</b>!
> I don't see any reason to lock it. This thread brings up a legitimate, original point about Kirk's PG abilities and this is a separate discussion from the other threads.


seperate? KH vs JC. Hmmm, let me see if i can dig up 10 posts in the last 2 days on this subject


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> i dont think kirk is selfish, but he tends to *'fish for assists'*. he tends to feed gill and blount more because those guys are our most consistant stop and pop shooters.. meaning they give kirk the best chance for an assists. i dont think kirk is neccesarily selfish for 'fishing for assists', he preferrs passing to blount and gill over Jc because although Jc is the best scorer on the active roster.. he dosent give kirk the best chance for that dime based on the simple fact that Jc needs that extra dribble and step before he takes his jumpers.. that dosent give kirk the assists he wants.
> 
> is it selfish? i wouldnt say so, but he needs to feed the hothand regardless of whether that hothand is a guy that needs that extra step and dribble
> ...


JC had 16 field goals yesterday and the nba is very liberal at giving out assist ..if craword took an extra dribble or 2 before shooting it would still be an assist for kirk

but continually feeding gill who went 3-14 was not in the best interest of the team


----------



## Louie (Jun 13, 2002)

> seperate? KH vs JC. Hmmm, let me see if i can dig up 10 posts in the last 2 days on this subject


This not just about KH vs. JC- it's specifically about Kirk's unwillingness to pass to Jamal. Anyway, if this really bothers you so much, you can always voice your objection by not posting here.


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> JC had 16 field goals yesterday and the nba is very liberal at giving out assist ..if craword took an extra dribble or 2 before shooting it would still be an assist for kirk
> ...



yes,, but thats just what i think is going through kirk's head right now. he see's gill and blount and thinks "Money''(automatic assist).. and when he see's jamal he's more hesitant. thats why i say he "Fishes for assists".. he prefers to pass to the people who will get him that dime. i wouldnt neccesarily say thats selfish, but its a major issue that needs to be corrected

The Pacers biggest gripe about tinsley last year was the fact that he tends to fish for assists also, and often passes up point blank open shots from 5 feet or so to get that extra dime on the statline


----------



## RoRo (Aug 21, 2002)

the other team is allowed to play defense. when kirk has the ball teams focus on denying jamal the ball. that's why jc is starting to run through all those screens on the baseline. still despite those picks, jamal's defender and the screener's defender cheats in jamal's direction. this is when we end up with a gill/jyd/ad/blount midrange jumper. and then i yell at the tv when they shoot.

that's why jamal passes more often to kirk too. jamal ends up by the arc with the ball, he drives, and the first guy he attracts is gill's man or kh's. gill get's that midrange jumper or hinrich gets a good look at the three. jamal doesn't drive deep enough to get handoffs for the 4's and 5's...yet...

when kh drives, i'm willing to guess that jamal's defender doesn't leave to help.

of course i'm just an armchair analyst so hey i could be wrong.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

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


looking for personal #s instead of whats best for the team is being selfish it doesn't matter if its rebounds ,points or assists

and i have to disagree with the notion that blount shooting mid-range J's is an automatic assist


----------



## FanOfAll8472 (Jun 28, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>truebluefan</b>!
> 
> 
> JC passed the ball to kirk because kirk is the pg. Kirk has 3 other guys to pass to. Have you ever thought maybe kirk is not suppose to pass the ball to jamal to START the offense, even though Jamal may be the end result of it? Kirk could just being doing what he is told to do.


Nice post . I was gonna say that but I came here too late...


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

This is a bunch of crap in my book. No other way to put it.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

It's amazing Kirk has a job according to a few posts on this thread.



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> I know we've seen this enough , but there is something i noticed because of reading game threads over the lasst week.
> 
> Kirk is selfish , It may sounds strange considering he had 11 assists yesterday but yes it is true.
> ...


Simplistic logic never looked so bad.

Like I told futuristxen -- maybe, just maybe, Jamal had such a great game last night _because_ of the way Kirk moves the ball (ie, get it to other guys first, not just simply tossing it to Jamal and running back down the floor) -- not _in spite_ of it?

Think about that for a bit and get back to me.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>JOHNNY_BRAVisimO</b>!
> i dont think kirk is selfish, but he tends to *'fish for assists'*. he tends to feed gill and blount more because those guys are our most consistant stop and pop shooters.. meaning they give kirk the best chance for an assists. i dont think kirk is neccesarily selfish for 'fishing for assists', he preferrs passing to blount and gill over Jc because although Jc is the best scorer on the active roster.. he dosent give kirk the best chance for that dime based on the simple fact that Jc needs that extra dribble and step before he takes his jumpers.. that dosent give kirk the assists he wants.


Oh my. How much basketball have some of you guys played/watched?

This thread is incredible.


----------



## airety (Oct 29, 2002)

*Could we please take a break from the Bulls Player X vs Bulls Player Y threads? They just end up with board members belittling one player to praise the other, even when they wouldn't belittle one of our players anyways.

Thanks.*


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> 
> 
> The most reasonable explanation is vincent vega's about how Kirk doesn't have the confidence yet to freelance on offense, so thus he won't break a play to feed the hot hand, and that the real problem here is that Gill is taking an unhealthy amount of shots instead of making the extra pass to Crawford.
> ...


Bingo.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> my proof , for fun i decided to count how many passes kirk threw to jamal last night , i figured it would be something to do in the 1st quarter and i would soon stop ...until the end of the 1st quarter and I noticed kirk had passed the ball to crawford 1 time in 12 minutes of play


Hate to break it to you, happygrinch, but you're manipulating the stats to further your cause. In the first quarter, *Kirk had 2 assists to Jamal Crawford alone* -- kind of defeats your little premise that Kirk only _threw_ it to him once in that period.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/gamelog?gameId=231227004

Kirk finished the game with 4 assists to Jamal. The next highest number of assists to Jamal was by Gill (3 total), and I imagine a lot of those came directly after a pass to Gill from Hinrich. Jamal had a lot of baskets that did not count for assists last night as well.

Happygrinch, next time you try to propagandize, at least get your facts straight. Skewing them to make your cause look good only undermines your credibility.


----------



## Illstate2 (Nov 11, 2003)

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


I don't know if I'm ready to believe that Kirk goes "fishing" for assists. I sure hope not, because if he is, then he is selfish. I really haven't watched it closely enough to notice. If you are playing for personal stats as opposed to the overall good of the team, you are being selfish.


----------



## Illstate2 (Nov 11, 2003)

*Re: Re: JC vs. KH*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, happygrinch, but you're manipulating the stats to further your cause. In the first quarter, *Kirk had 2 assists to Jamal Crawford alone* -- kind of defeats your little premise that Kirk only _threw_ it to him once in that period.
> ...


Oops, didn't see this. Thanks VincentVega for alleviating my fears.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

You know what p!sses me off? People who have an agenda who consciously skew the facts in an effort to push their own views or wishes upon others who will listen.

Happygrinch lost all credibility with me, and all I had to do was check gametracker.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

And if Kirk is "fishing for assists" instead of doing what he feels best enables the team to win, I've been watching a completely different player for the last half decade.

Some of you need to quit trying to spike the Haterade.


----------



## Illstate2 (Nov 11, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> You know what p!sses me off? People who have an agenda who consciously skew the facts in an effort to push their own views or wishes upon others who will listen.
> 
> Happygrinch lost all credibility with me, and all I had to do was check gametracker.


How do you know he consciously skewed the facts? Maybe it was just human error. After all, it does seem that he said he was doing it while watching the game.


----------



## Chicago N VA (Oct 31, 2003)

Obviously, Hinrich "The Great" is way better than Crawford "The Scrub"...


You guys are arguing that Hinrich doesn't fill the stat sheet, but his intangibles are so great.

*Newsflash* Intangibles alone doesn't win championships..

Hinrich stats 

Crawford Stats 

Even with JC's famous shooting slump why does he have a better shooting % than Hinrich "The Great"?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

Chicago N VA, you're completely going off the edge. Don't get hysterical. Nobody called Hinrich "the Great", and nobody called Crawford "the Scrub".


----------



## JOHNNY_BRAVisimO (Jun 11, 2002)

*Re: Re: JC vs. KH*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> Hate to break it to you, happygrinch, but you're manipulating the stats to further your cause. In the first quarter, *Kirk had 2 assists to Jamal Crawford alone* -- kind of defeats your little premise that Kirk only _threw_ it to him once in that period.
> ...


thanks for proving me wrong, 4 assists is plenty


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Illstate2</b>!
> 
> 
> How do you know he consciously skewed the facts? Maybe it was just human error. After all, it does seem that he said he was doing it while watching the game.


It's not that hard when watching a game with the intent of presenting a case or an analysis to get your facts straight, especially when they're not very hard to observe in the first place. It's really not too terribly difficult to observe a pass, mark an X on a piece of paper, and proceed watching the game. You don't even have to look at the piece of paper you're marking on. Maybe you could even get a little hand-clicker! It's a basketball game, not particle physics. Hell, I _knew_ that Kirk had multiple assists to Crawford in the first quarter last night, and that was based off of freaking memory.

Getting the numbers wrong on a game of hoops and then trying to present a case for your (erroneous) observations is tantamount to observing stock A and presenting a case for stock B. Except, of course, this is a simple game of hoops, not high-grade economics.


----------



## Chicago N VA (Oct 31, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> Chicago N VA, you're completely going off the edge. Don't get hysterical. Nobody called Hinrich "the Great", and nobody called Crawford "the Scrub".


maybe..... 

but by reading these threads at times...

It seems like even when Hinrich has a mediocre game it's like some want to make it out as 

errrrr eventhough the stats doesn't show it... Hinrich played well brought so much defense (like he the only one who plays D on the team), ran the offense.. 

Never ever pointing out legitimate flaws.. in Hinrich's game.. and there are some.

I just wish the JC vs. Hinrich arguments go away..

I root for the Bulls and all the Bulls included.


----------



## badfish (Feb 4, 2003)

Thanks VV for clearing this up. I'm an infrequent poster but feel compelled to post on this one. I see a lot of positve vibes going on between these two guys on and off the floor. Crawsover has had nothing but positive things to say about Kirk and playing with Kirk.

I tend to believe the notion that Kirk is making a concerted effort to run the offense as its supposed to be run. A more textbook style, for now. As his confidence grows I suspect he'll do more freelancing. He's a rookie who is still learning the pro game. Don't forget that he's had to throw out everything he learned in his first pro camp to pick up a new offense 4 weeks ago. A tough challenge for anybody let alone a rookie.

Also, I think a big reason why Kirk is well-liked by his young teammates and veteran teammates is the fact that he plays humble, along with his hustle. "Fishing for assists"?!?! Wow! I think if there's a fault anywhere it has to do with his tentativeness in shooting the open three. We're not talking about passing up 5-footers here a la Tinsley. Besides, the last few games Kirk has been more apt to take the three when its there compared to the beginning of the season. Again, I think this is a matter of confidence.

I'm not as knowledgeable as some of the posters here but I have watched every game this season on my DirectTV.  And I just don't see what this thread is all about.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>badfish</b>!
> Thanks VV for clearing this up. I'm an infrequent poster but feel compelled to post on this one. I see a lot of positve vibes going on between these two guys on and off the floor. Crawsover has had nothing but positive things to say about Kirk and playing with Kirk.
> 
> I tend to believe the notion that Kirk is making a concerted effort to run the offense as its supposed to be run. A more textbook style, for now. As his confidence grows I suspect he'll do more freelancing. He's a rookie who is still learning the pro game. Don't forget that he's had to throw out everything he learned in his first pro camp to pick up a new offense 4 weeks ago. A tough challenge for anybody let alone a rookie.
> ...


Thanks for making this thread worthwhile.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>Chicago N VA</b>!
> 
> 
> maybe.....
> ...


Agreed. I think until these last couple of games, Hinrich generally played better defense than JC, and when he had a bad shooting night he wouldn't shoot 20+ shots because he wasn't the #1 option -- so, naturally, before this weekend when JC had a bad game it was magnified a lot more than when Hinrich had a bad game. JC's being in the League a lot longer also exacerbates this quite a bit. It's just a natural tendency of fandom to nit pick when the stakes are higher and the context is elevated. Thus, JC receives more hyperbolic praise and criticism than does Hinrich.

I could spew off a long list about the flaws in Kirk's game, but that's for another thread, preferably after he's had more time to either prove or disprove my feelings on his game.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>badfish</b>!
> Thanks VV for clearing this up. I'm an infrequent poster but feel compelled to post on this one. I see a lot of positve vibes going on between these two guys on and off the floor. Crawsover has had nothing but positive things to say about Kirk and playing with Kirk.
> 
> I tend to believe the notion that Kirk is making a concerted effort to run the offense as its supposed to be run. A more textbook style, for now. As his confidence grows I suspect he'll do more freelancing. He's a rookie who is still learning the pro game. Don't forget that he's had to throw out everything he learned in his first pro camp to pick up a new offense 4 weeks ago. A tough challenge for anybody let alone a rookie.
> ...


5 star post. Agreed 100%.

I guess some people just revel in conflict and overreaction.


----------



## C Blizzy (Nov 13, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> I know we've seen this enough , but there is something i noticed because of reading game threads over the lasst week.
> 
> Kirk is selfish , It may sounds strange considering he had 11 assists yesterday but yes it is true.
> ...


Grinch, you need a more productive hobby! :grinning:


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: JC vs. KH*



> Originally posted by <b>C Blizzy</b>!
> 
> 
> Grinch, you need a more productive hobby! :grinning:


If grinch built model airplanes with the precision he analyzes basketball games, he'd be constructing B-17's with landing gear in the cockpit.  

Sorry, felt like a Goonies moment. And yes, I used to build model airplanes, but I sold them in high school so I could go out and party like a mad scientist.


----------



## BG7 (Jun 25, 2003)

Kirk does ignore Jamal like Ive said before it just wasnt this game...Ive been saying it for a while now.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

This is hilarioius. Happygrinch/MadGrinch is spreading his propaganda on realgm as well.

http://www.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?t=195295&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Sorry dude, but after I finish this post I'm going to disperse the facts over there as well.


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

There's something to be said for magnanimity in victory as well. :yes:


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

My magnanimity is inversely proportional to the ubiquity of the topic.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

i counted 6 and the assist to crawford from 20 ft. i i had in my mind came from gill , if i was wrong on that one well than i was no biggy ...the count moves up to 7 

but a bigger question is my apparent agenda which is...well i'd like ol' V V to let me in on it 

could it be i want kirk benched?

nah ..i've been in favor of JC and kirk starting from some time now ,in fact i believe their games ideally mesh together very well something which i've said numerous times

maybe i want kirk hit by a bus or some other large vehicle ?

nope ,i like kirk and i've also said it on numerous occasions 

aestetic issues ? perhaps maybe its i dont like the form in which kirk shoots, passes,dribbles or plays defense 


when you can find a post with even mentioning anything close to this let me know because i'm pretty sure all I care about are results, kirk can eat chile and pass gas on the way to hoop for all i care as long as he plays effectively

what can it be ...oh what can it be ?

could it be in a game in which a player on the team is literally killing the other team the supposed "pg" on the team went away from him to feed gill as if gill were not merely at this point a defensive player with a lil' offensive punch who by the way shot 3-14 so its not like there was a close decision in the sense that kirk had 2 players to chose from who were putting the ball in the basket .

would any bulls fans here be so supportive of kirk if the name was different ?

lets say its curry destroying all in front of him ,would anyone here really think there is any reason good enough for kirk not to ,not just run plays but to go out of his way to feed him but instead fed eddie robinson into a 2-12 effort?

of course not and in truth its only magnified because kirk does handle the ball so much. If i thought eddie robinson were avoiding passing it to whomever i would have a problem with it whether it was kendall gill ,or chandler or curry or crawford or whoever is on the team . 

that's not how the game should be played ...maybe thats my agenda ...no thats too easy 

and to TBF is there really any mystery to the way crawford gets his points ? how often is anyone surprised and thinks hmmm i thought for sure he was going to pass off .

crawford is an isolation type scorer and tends to have the ball at least 5 seconds before he shoots it, either dribbling it running around screens or just surveying the court 

i doubt very much how he gets the ball affects very much whether or not he scores since he tends to dribble himself into position to score anyway . 

he doesn't get set up much and that is not kirk's fault jamal doesn't do things that allow for it much ,but when he's hot you have to get it to him , 

the rest of the team seemed to go out their way if they saw jamal near to get him the ball (gill in particular) but the guy who is supposed to have those instincts simply didn't .


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*No big deal, really*

I merely think you're seeing what you want to see. In my defense, I have statistical proof to back me up on this.

You wrote an awful lot in your thesis explaining how and why Kirk Hinrich barely passes the ball to Jamal Crawford. After some facts were entered into the equation, and after your "numbers" were proven wrong, you now offer a mere two short sentences (which don't really address the initial glaring omission of facts) as some sort of passing explanation.

I guess I can safely say I saw this one coming.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> I merely think you're seeing what you want to see. In my defense, I have statistical proof to back me up on this.
> 
> You wrote an awful lot in your thesis explaining how and why Kirk Hinrich barely passes the ball to Jamal Crawford. After some facts were entered into the equation, and after your "numbers" were proven wrong, you now offer a mere two short sentences (which don't really address the initial glaring omission of facts) as some sort of passing explanation.
> ...


i'm still waiting on what my agenga is?

according to you it would be the stuff to make oliver stone blush.

the difference is when i say something i can be a man about it , not avoid it all together in some lame attempt to make myself feel good and i guess save face in the wake of what i would call a pretty corny accusation


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Hmmmm...I don't know I haven't really noticed that Kirk has any aversion to passing to Jamal. Of course I haven't really looked for it either. Perhaps we should all keep tabs on the 1st quarter of tonights game and see what happens?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> i'm still waiting on what my agenga is?
> ...


I don't know what your agenda is. But I do know you manipulated stats and presented them as fact in multiple forums. That is simply not cool. And there has to be a driving force as to why you made your observations the way you did in the first place, and subsequently posted them as fact in multiple forums.

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist to theorize that you might not have the most objective view of the Bulls backcourt.

One other thing -- entering back into a thread and offering two sentences as justification for a patently inaccurate, multi-paragraphed initial thesis is not exactly what I'd call being "a man about it". It's called trying to cover your backside because you've been called out in front of a crowd. But that's just how I see it.

P.S. Apparently you haven't been "a man" over on your realgm thread. Why not? It's the same words, same thesis.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know what your agenda is. But I do know you manipulated stats and presented them as fact in multiple forums. That is simply not cool. And there has to be a driving force as to why you made your observations the way you did in the first place, and subsequently posted them as fact in multiple forums.
> ...


In all fairness, isn't it possible he just misinterpreted what he saw or something equally incocuous?


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> In all fairness, isn't it possible he just misinterpreted what he saw or something equally incocuous?


I covered this on Page 3.

Sure it's possible, but I simply cannot see how a person who has obviously watched a fair amount of basketball can be so off the mark in making simple observations. Let's hope Happygrinch isn't a statistician.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> I covered this on Page 3.
> ...


Maybe he had some chemically induced visual aids


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> I don't know what your agenda is. But I do know you manipulated stats and presented them as fact in multiple forums. That is simply not cool. And there has to be a driving force as to why you made your observations the way you did in the first place, and subsequently posted them as fact in multiple forums.
> ...


while its funny to me that you are apparently stalking my posts across the internet. I must say something .

you talk about my views of the bulls backcourt but you never actually say what they are . 

you talk of my agenda which you apparently dont know what it is but for some odd reason you seem certain that it exists(Am I like a God to you ? Do you have faith in me?)

the truth is you seem to have some sort of agenda , you back kansas ballplayers(see how easy i can spot an agenda you must be stevie wonder of the conspriracy world , if of course i do have this mystical agenda) , i dont really care i back bulls players i want the best for my team

as for my post on realgm i didn't see it on the list of topics I assume its on the 2nd or 3rd page i dont keep every on every topic i post on forever when it leaves the page to me its generally gone forever, and while I'm sure its big fun to follow me across the information superhighway , sometimes lil' camper i have things to do and cant talk to you about every little thing. 

I didn't enter back into this thread as if to say i went away from it , i posted yesterday , and i posted today , its what i do i dont post every hour on the hour and i dont unlike you cast aspersions on people when i am supposed to know better and give my alma mater some kind of insane ideaologies known only to myself (you cant be a primadonna and have"lasted"at kansas .i cant believe you wrote that ...do the campus police come by every so often and test your ego? just to make sure you aren't getting too cocky, and you are found to be a primadonna what then are you kicked out of school or molested in the showers until the student takes it upon themselves to leave?)speaking of cocky aren't you the egotistical one acting as if your views are in fact so on the level I might believe you could be objective but i think we both know that if kirk wasn't on the team you would not be posting on this forum.

so your objectivity may be slightly off dontya think?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> 
> 
> In all fairness, isn't it possible he just misinterpreted what he saw or something equally incocuous?


ace, i already answered this i remember the play in question i mistook kirk for gill apparently ( dont know how but hey) VV wants to make moutains out of molehills he can be my guess. 7 is only marginally better than 6 in my book. maybe its a grand canyon of difference to him


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

Come on guys, lets avoid all the personal agendas and comments please! Thanks!


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> while its funny to me that you are apparently stalking my posts across the internet. I must say something .


No, I just peruse realgm from time to time. No "stalking" required. Just an interest in Bulls basketball.



> you talk about my views of the bulls backcourt but you never actually say what they are .


I'll say it again for good measure: you see what you want to see. And that is an exaggerated perception of Jamal Crawford and an overly derogatory perception of Kirk Hinrich. From the preseason where you stated that Hinrich was not a good player to now where you can't even initiate honest, objective discussion on him, I think this has become patently obvious to many posters on this site.



> you talk of my agenda which you apparently dont know what it is but for some odd reason you seem certain that it exists(Am I like a God to you ? Do you have faith in me?)


I've stated my case. I'll let this thread do the talking.



> the truth is you seem to have some sort of agenda , you back kansas ballplayers(see how easy i can spot an agenda you must be stevie wonder of the conspriracy world , if of course i do have this mystical agenda) ,


Here we go again. Ask futuristxen and rlucas about what you just said and get back to me.



> as for my post on realgm i didn't see it on the list of topics I assume its on the 2nd or 3rd page i dont keep every on every topic i post on forever when it leaves the page to me its generally gone forever, and while I'm sure its big fun to follow me across the information superhighway , sometimes lil' camper i have things to do and cant talk to you about every little thing.


It's not that hard to click "next" on the little "Go to page" menu down at the bottom of the page. For your convenience, I added a post to the thread over there so you wouldn't have to dig all the way to Page 2 to find it.



> (you cant be a primadonna and have"lasted"at kansas .i cant believe you wrote that ...do the campus police come by every so often and test your ego? just to make sure you aren't getting too cocky, and you are found to be a primadonna what then are you kicked out of school or molested in the showers until the student takes it upon themselves to leave?)


First off: WHAT? You're rambling on about shower molestation instead of grasping my point.
My point: A player can't be a primadonna at a major basketball school and last. Not on the basketball floor anyway, which was what I was referring to. And especially not in a Kansas system run by Roy Williams, or an Arizona system run by Lute Olsen, or an Oklahoma System run by Kelvin Sampson.....selfish play equals bench time on championship-caliber clubs.



> speaking of cocky aren't you the egotistical one acting as if your views are in fact so on the level I might believe you could be objective but i think we both know that if kirk wasn't on the team you would not be posting on this forum.


Once again, I've gone over this, but apparently you either didn't read the initial salvo regarding this topic or you forgot what you read. I don't hold my views as "fact"...but I do tend to put more faith in opinions that are backed by facts and statistical evidence than I do those that defy facts and statistical evidence. Don't deride me for subscribing to basic logic.



> so your objectivity may be slightly off dontya think?


No.


----------



## Natty Dreadlockz (Jul 21, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>ace20004u</b>!
> Come on guys, lets avoid all the personal agendas and comments please! Thanks!


Why?... This is the best thread I've read in day's!


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> ace, i already answered this i remember the play in question i mistook kirk for gill apparently ( dont know how but hey) VV wants to make moutains out of molehills he can be my guess. 7 is only marginally better than 6 in my book. maybe its a grand canyon of difference to him


1. How you can mistake Kirk Hinrich for Kendall Gill is beyond me. I'm pretty much speechless right now. Wow.

2. My main point was how you can claim with an honest face that Kirk "is selfish" and only passed the ball to Jamal "1 time in 12 minutes of play", when in fact *gametracker says that Kirk had 2 assists to Crawford alone in the first quarter.*

3. You are now conveniently changing the argument to how many assists Jamal received from Hinrich and Gill, when that was NOT the argument you presented in the beginning. Here's a refresher:



> ...i kept count and at the end of it all the number of times kirk had passed the ball to jamal crawford on a career night was an incredible 6
> 
> thats it 6 times did the ball leave kirks hands and travel through the air and went in crawford's direction.


You started off saying Kirk only passed the ball once to Jamal in the first quarter (this is obviously wrong), and then you say Kirk only passed the ball six times to Jamal during the entire game. I find this awfully hard to believe, seeing as how Kirk ended up with 4 assists to Crawford and knowing that Jamal normally takes a lot of dribbles to set himself up. Now you're suddenly arguing that 7 total assists between Hinrich and Gill doesn't mean squat compared to 6? When did you ever argue this in the first place? _I_ presented that information in the first place. Now you're leaching onto my comments and trying to appropriate them into your statements. This I find very telling.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> No, I just peruse realgm from time to time. No "stalking" required. Just an interest in Bulls basketball.
> ...


1st of all there you go with the lies and false accusations . i have never said kirk was not a good player , i do however say he is not what people make him out to be and i will point out his flaws to prove it. 

people will take a quote about a player and blow it out of proportion . 

just because someone says kirk can be a an all nba defender one day doesn't mean he is a great defender today. some actually make the claim that kirk is the best player on the team and other such silliness .

just because people claim it dont make it so.

i always thought kirk would have a good rookie year and i bumped a couple of threads to prove it just for you

if you can find me this magical post where i said kirk is not good by all means do it but i think you'll wind up eating crow

and your primadonna theory is well stupid . there are tons of them in the nba and yes alot of them went to big college programs

kobe got coack K to let go of his mantra wanting players to stay for 4 years and he didn't even go , if he had gone i doubt very much he would have been benched for being a primadonna and he definitely would have been one considering he didn't want to take a backseat to shaq .

do you think he would have taken one to elton brand?or carlos boozer or even chicago's own jay williams?

but in your mind he would have thoughtfully sat around and never cause a bit of trouble 

like rasheed wallace in UNC right?


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> 1. How you can mistake Kirk Hinrich for Kendall Gill is beyond me. I'm pretty much speechless right now. Wow.
> ...


1st of all learn to read. since i have had to repeat myself for you to understand anything at all.

and i said 7 as in passes ...if you can find assists in that post(and i mean anywhere in that post, the word just was not typed by me kind of ironic when you think about how you are harping about a pass i didn't see , and you are seeing words that aren't there) please by all means let me know its just another case you not paying attention to what you are supposed to be reading. 

its kind of funny how your point 2 and 3 are connected ...but seeing how #2 is a complete fabrication seeing as i never even wrote assists anywhere in the post you are debating that i changed my agument to include assists, one can only conclude reading comprehension isn't very important to you, so since #2 is made up in the recesses of your mind #3 is too as it is a claim off your 2nd point that i am changing my view somehow 


did you watch the game ? i'm wondering because i dont see alot of actual 1st hand knowledge expressed so i'm thinking this is all alot of bluster from you but i dont get the feeling you actually saw the game.

have fun explaining this VV i'm sure i'll enjoy it too


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

I stand corrected regarding my accusations that I thought you didn't think KH would be a good pro.

My apologies, and another link proving me wrong in this regard:

http://www.basketballboards.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=44287&perpage=15&pagenumber=1


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> Kirk is selfish , It may sounds strange considering he had 11 assists yesterday but yes it is true.
> 
> my proof , for fun i decided to count how many passes kirk threw to jamal last night , i figured it would be something to do in the 1st quarter and i would soon stop ...until the end of the 1st quarter and I noticed kirk had passed the ball to crawford 1 time in 12 minutes of play
> ...


http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/gamelog?gameId=231227004

1st Quarter Summary
7:31 8-10 Jamal Crawford made 24 ft Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Kirk Hinrich. 
5:39 10-16 Jamal Crawford made 20 ft Jumper. Assisted by Kirk Hinrich. 

Two assists means at least two passes.

Now for the rest of the game:

4th Quarter Summary
10:07 64-79 Jamal Crawford made 20 ft Jumper. Assisted by Kirk Hinrich. 
9:45 64-82 Jamal Crawford made 27 ft Three Point Jumper. Assisted by Kirk Hinrich.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> I stand corrected regarding my accusations that I thought you didn't think KH would be a good pro.
> 
> My apologies, and another link proving me wrong in this regard:
> ...


no problem , i really do want the best for him.

he is talented without a doubt but no rookie is God not even Lebron, though its hard to tell by watching his commercials


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> 1st of all learn to read. since i have had to repeat myself for you to understand anything at all.


In all fairness, your sentences aren't the easiest to read.



> and i said 7 as in passes ...


No you didn't. You said "7 is only marginally better than 6 in my book". My mistake in figuring that you meant assists (the reason I assumed you meant assists is because I had previously stated that Hinrich had 4 assists to Jamal, and Gill had 3, for a total of 7 between them). So, you have my apologies -- next time I'll have to break out my decoder ring.

The main point is this: I honestly don't see how you can be so wrong on one thing (the "single" pass to Jamal in the first quarter, obviously false) in addition to being so sure of another inaccurate observation made in the same post (ie, KH supposedly only passed to JC six times during the entire game), and then back your stance up by shrugging your shoulders and simply adding another "pass" from KH to JC (7 now instead of 6) after I introduce the wonderful world of statistical accuracy courtesy of gametracker. No offense, but I'm not believing you this time either.



> did you watch the game ? i'm wondering because i dont see alot of actual 1st hand knowledge expressed so i'm thinking this is all alot of bluster from you but i dont get the feeling you actually saw the game.


Yes, I did, as I stated earlier.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> 
> In all fairness, your sentences aren't the easiest to read.
> ...


i have question for you, have I ever mentioned how many assists were created from the passes in question?

i'm sure i haven't( i made no attepmt to count that) so any leap to try to change what i was saying was done by you , and you alone.

you are the one who mentioned it and you can check, i never addressed it even once , so your misuderstanding i have to leave as your own fault,I'll assume you weren't just trying to see what you wanted to further your own argument

and since everything on this thread is written down in black and white its kind of hard for you to say i'm wrong on this one


----------



## MikeDC (Jul 16, 2002)

*Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: No big deal, really*



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> 
> i have question for you, have I ever mentioned how many assists were created from the passes in question?


So Kirk was given two assists for one first quarter pass to Jamal? :laugh: 

That's a pretty impressive feat.



> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> 
> my proof , for fun i decided to count how many passes kirk threw to jamal last night , i figured it would be something to do in the 1st quarter and i would soon stop ...until the end of the 1st quarter and I noticed kirk had passed the ball to crawford 1 time in 12 minutes of play





> Originally posted by <b>VincentVega</b>!
> 
> In the first quarter, Kirk had 2 assists to Jamal Crawford alone
> 
> http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/gamelog?gameId=231227004


----------



## Zeos (Jun 4, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>happygrinch</b>!
> I know we've seen this enough , but there is something i noticed because of reading game threads over the lasst week.
> 
> Kirk is selfish , It may sounds strange considering he had 11 assists yesterday but yes it is true.
> ...


Totally wrong. Very simple explanation: Kirk is running plays. The plays are designed to get certain players open in spots where they can score. If it's Blount, it's Blount. If it's Gill, it's Gill. If it's Crawford, it's Crawford.

If Kirk runs a play and gets the ball to Gill, Gill catches the ball with the defense out of position and causes an adjustment and passes the ball to Jamal and Jamal scores, Gill gets the assist and Jamal gets the points. Kirk gets a pat on the back for running the offense, and doing exactly what he's supposed to do.

See, there's this little thing about the opposing team playing defense. The defense is designed to take Jamal out as the #1 option. If Kirk's running the offense, then the Kirk - Jamal pass is exactly the one the defense is trying to prevent over all others. So, what do you do? Run your plays and get someone a good shot. The fact that Gill took 14 shots and only made 3, well, that happens, just like it happens to Jamal. The question is whether they're GOOD shots. I don't know exactly, but I bet they were.

I see Blount took 11 shots and made 6. Not bad, 55%. That's efficient offense. If Kirk's getting Blount quality shots, he's doing his job.

If the defense is taking away the first option, what you have to do is run the offense and try to get good shots. You gotta make the defense react to prevent layups and start scrambling and rotating and getting out of position to take away really good shots, and presto, the ball lands in your scorer's hands for an open 3 point shot and he makes 5 of 7. Selfish? No, just smart basketball.

That's my "common sense" answer to the question, but there's other evidence. First, Jamal has repeatedly said that he loves playing with Kirk. Who knows, maybe it's the same quote that the papers print and re-print, but maybe it's really the truth.

Second, 10 shot attempts and 11 assists? I'm not sure how anyone could construe selfish out of those stats.

Third, anyone watch Kirk play defense? I mean _help_ defense? Is there a better healthy help defender on the team? Probably Pippen and perhaps Chandler, but help defense is most certainly not the trait of a selfish player.

But for what it's worth, it's been far more fascinating to watch people talk about other people and hidden motives and agendas than basketball. Carry on.


----------



## airety (Oct 29, 2002)

Sidenote, I've completely skimmed this page because I'm not into comparing one Bulls player to another so microscopically... but Kirk assisted Jamal 4 times on jumpers?

Has Jamal embraced the catch and shoot, are they running pick and rolls, or what is it? I can't see the Bulls games on TV but as a sidenote I found it kinda interesting. It is HARD to get credited an assist when passing to a jump shooter that likes to make room himself (Crawford.)


----------



## DaBullz (Jul 15, 2002)

*Re: Re: JC vs. KH*



> Originally posted by <b>Zeos</b>!
> 
> 
> Totally wrong. Very simple explanation: Kirk is running plays. The plays are designed to get certain players open in spots where they can score. If it's Blount, it's Blount. If it's Gill, it's Gill. If it's Crawford, it's Crawford.
> ...


In my view, it's a good sign that guys like Blount, JYD, and AD are getting buckets on assists from Kirk. It's a good indication he's making his teammates better -- even the "lousier" ones.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

*Re: Re: JC vs. KH*



> Originally posted by <b>Zeos</b>!
> 
> 
> Totally wrong. Very simple explanation: Kirk is running plays. The plays are designed to get certain players open in spots where they can score. If it's Blount, it's Blount. If it's Gill, it's Gill. If it's Crawford, it's Crawford.
> ...


Extremely well put.


----------



## VincentVega (Oct 12, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>airety</b>!
> It is HARD to get credited an assist when passing to a jump shooter that likes to make room himself (Crawford.)


Exactly.

This whole thread is a bit mindboggling to me.


----------



## jsong (Nov 5, 2003)

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


Same here. Same here.


----------



## superdave (Jul 16, 2002)

Guys I've been away from the boards for a while (on vacation).. two weeks maybe....

Jamal has flat out impressed me. Its seems the past 4 games or so both he and Hinrich are sharing the point duties well. Case in point, Jamal's shot wasn't falling tonight.. and <b>he dishes out 12 dimes</b>. Just caught the tail end of tonights game.. wished I watched the whole thing. Damn. Its a Cartwright 'perfect PG' line w/ 8 pts and 12 dimes 

I've made a big deal about Jamal getting 10 dimes before in the past, but I gotta say his game as a whole is improving. While I still think his best function to the team is scoring... its nice to have another ballhandler who can run the show when Hinrich has his rookie ups and downs. Man. With Hinrich and Crawford.. we're finally seeing the dynamic two-way guard play we haven't seen since the days of MJ. I'm am impressed.. and I hope to God we don't shop Jamal anymore. I'd like to see him remain a Bull for the next 10 years.


----------



## ace20004u (Jun 19, 2002)

> Originally posted by <b>superdave</b>!
> Guys I've been away from the boards for a while (on vacation).. two weeks maybe....
> 
> Jamal has flat out impressed me. Its seems the past 4 games or so both he and Hinrich are sharing the point duties well. Case in point, Jamal's shot wasn't falling tonight.. and <b>he dishes out 12 dimes</b>. Just caught the tail end of tonights game.. wished I watched the whole thing. Damn. Its a Cartwright 'perfect PG' line w/ 8 pts and 12 dimes
> ...


I was thinking about you last night as Jamal crossed the 10 assist mark :laugh:


----------



## girlygirl (Dec 6, 2003)

I was reading some of the earlier posts about whether Kirk is selfish or not. Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see anyone point out that if you pass the ball to someone and he shoots but misses, you obviously don't get an assist. Same as when you pass the ball to one player who passes it to another player who then may or may not score. So just counting the number of assists a player (Kirk, in this example) has by another player's baskets (Jamal in this example) doesn't do a thorough job of showing whether the first player is being selfish.

I re-watched the game where Jamal had 42 points and Kirk had 11 assists. By my count, Bulls players missed nine other shots where Kirk would've gotten an assist if they had made the shot (I only counted wide-open jumpers or any sort of lay-up -- I didn't count shot attempts where a made basket was unlikely in any event). So Kirk could have had 20 assists in that game -- which isn't the mark of a selfish player.


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>girlygirl</b>!
> I was reading some of the earlier posts about whether Kirk is selfish or not. Perhaps I missed it, but I didn't see anyone point out that if you pass the ball to someone and he shoots but misses, you obviously don't get an assist. Same as when you pass the ball to one player who passes it to another player who then may or may not score. So just counting the number of assists a player (Kirk, in this example) has by another player's baskets (Jamal in this example) doesn't do a thorough job of showing whether the first player is being selfish.
> 
> I re-watched the game where Jamal had 42 points and Kirk had 11 assists. By my count, Bulls players missed nine other shots where Kirk would've gotten an assist if they had made the shot (I only counted wide-open jumpers or any sort of lay-up -- I didn't count shot attempts where a made basket was unlikely in any event). So Kirk could have had 20 assists in that game -- which isn't the mark of a selfish player.


The charge was more that he wasn't passing the ball to Jamal. Not that he wasn't getting assists, or even getting asssists to Jamal. Just talking about actual passes.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

In Jamal's 42-point game, for one thing Jamal was handling the point duties the majority of the time both guys were in. Kirk wasn't doing all of the table-setting and it was often Jamal who initiated the plays. And just counting the number of times a ball is passed to a certain player isn't a tell-all stat. The team is supposed to run plays in which certain passes get made in succession. Jamal is the primary scorer for the team, so sometimes it took 3 or 4 passes to get him the ball in the proper space for him to create a shot...and that was often AFTER he brought the ball up and started the process. I also never recalled seeing Kirk look off an open Jamal in order to pass somewhere else or take a bad shot. Kirk ran the offense mainly when Jamal was out or off of missed shots where they attempted to push the ball. 

a player gets 11 assists and gets labeled selfish? a player gets 42 points and there is talk that he was "frozen out"? What is this, bizarro world?  :uhoh:


----------



## futuristxen (Jun 26, 2003)

I did see Kirk look off Jamal. I've seen it happen a few times. However, as I said on like page 2, I believe VincentVega's explanation about Kirk running the offense and not having enough confidence yet to freelance. It wasn't a one game thing. It was something I pointed out a week or so back watching the bulls.

Pretty much everything that can be said about this topic has already been said by someone.


----------



## ViciousFlogging (Sep 3, 2003)

> Originally posted by <b>futuristxen</b>!
> I did see Kirk look off Jamal. I've seen it happen a few times. However, as I said on like page 2, I believe VincentVega's explanation about Kirk running the offense and not having enough confidence yet to freelance. It wasn't a one game thing. It was something I pointed out a week or so back watching the bulls.
> 
> Pretty much everything that can be said about this topic has already been said by someone.


ok, but did he look him off when he was wide open or in a great position to score, or just when he was on the perimeter with his man nearby (I know I know, Jamal can score easily in that situation too, but you know what I mean)? I saw Kirk choose to throw a pass into a player further inside (like Blount or AD or Gill for jumpers, quick shots) instead of giving it to Jamal on the wing (the way that Jamal and Jay used to give it to Rose and get out of the way), but I didn't see him deliberately choose not to pass to Jamal when he was in a good position to score quickly. This is just one game I'm talking about, though. And I would agree that it seemed like, in this game anyway, Kirk was almost TOO mindful of moving the ball around in the way it was diagrammed, which would probably cause him to hesitate to break a play just get the ball in Jamal's hands. oh well. even when the bulls play well there has to be drama.


----------

