# UM.....?!? Skip Bayless says that Derrick Rose definitely not MVP caliber.



## JonH818 (Aug 31, 2006)

*(UPDATE) Skip Bayless says that Derrick Rose definitely not MVP caliber.*

He also says that Derrick Rose is more of a two guard than a point guard. What is this guy talking about?

http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=6190047


----------



## JonH818 (Aug 31, 2006)

He picks Kobe Bryant because what he has done after the all star break?!?!?! What about the entire season?! So the MVP of the league has to only play good the last half of the season. This guy angers me. If he would've said Lebron or Dirk Nowitzki, I wouldn't really argue it.


----------



## Ron Cey (Dec 27, 2004)

And Skip totally means it too, and isn't just saying it to stir up controversy!


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

Skips role on first take is to be controversial. He plays the antagonist so that his name continues to be relevant.


----------



## BenDengGo (Feb 1, 2004)

let him talk all he wants, but lets be real, mvp is going to be either derrick, dirk or dwight.


----------



## Pay Ton (Apr 18, 2003)

The funny thing is he's supposedly a real super nice guy in real life.

It's just an act, fellas. Don't take it seriously.

I believe, on some level, he does believe the things he does, but he obviously magnifies his opinions to the point of parody for effect.


----------



## HB (May 1, 2004)

There are a lot of folks (mostly the stats guys) that dont think Rose is a MVP caliber player either.


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

Wikipedia

// Bayless was born in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and graduated from Northwest Classen High School and Vanderbilt University.
Bayless went directly from Vanderbilt to The Miami Herald, where he wrote sports features for two years before being hired away by the Los Angeles Times.

At 25, Bayless was hired by The Dallas Morning News
After covering the Cowboys through the 1996 season, Bayless chose to leave Dallas after 17 years and become the lead sports columnist for the Chicago Tribune. 

In his first year in Chicago, Bayless won the Lisagor Award for excellence in sports column writing and was voted Illinois sportswriter of the year. Bayless eventually had a highly publicized dispute with the Tribune's executive editor, Ann Marie Lipinski, over limiting all Tribune columns to just 650 or so words. Bayless quit over the policy and … //


----------



## RoseToNoah (Jul 7, 2010)

I don't care...... at all. I just want the bulls to keep winning and maybe, just maybe they can catch the celtics. If he doesn't win the MVP, it should go to Dwight.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

everyone has their own opinions on different topics...and this time, skip's opinion is wrong. that's my opinion.


----------



## SWIFTSLICK (Aug 22, 2009)

Not all the people in the media will vote for Derrick Rose for MVP. In fact, a majority of them may not vote for him. Due to the fact that other players get more attention. LBJ or Dirk, Maybe even Dwight Howard will get nods over D.Rose. MVP is not that important of a race anymore. It's not like it used to be. 

When was the last time a league MVP was in the Finals? Kobe in 2008? LAL lost that series. Before that it was Tim Duncan in 2003 (last guy to collect a league MVP, Finals Winner, Finals MVP). This award has been kind of meaningless lately.


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

With a lockout looming, this MVP is really important for the Bulls organization. It would solidify Rose as a top player and it would be easier to recruit when you have the league's MVP. Howard will be available after next year and the Magic will do a sign and trade before they just let him walk. I guess Noah and a couple of first round picks is better than nothing. Maybe the Magic would rather have Lopez from NJ. Who knows...speculating is fun.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Rose is the sexy pick right now. If the season ended today the MVp would go to him. Lebron is hated on too much to win the award, Kobe doesn't deserve it, noone from the Spurs or celtics has a chance, and the Magic are too far back in the standings for Howard to win it. So that leaves Rose who has the stats that MVP voters look for but more importantly has a great record on a team viewed to be full of good role players, but no all-stars. 

In reality Our team has multiple all-star caliber players and wins primarily because of phenomenal defense and rebounding. But public perception give Rose an excellent chance at winning this year and I think he is the clear-cut front runner.


----------



## PD (Sep 10, 2004)

just think about this. It takes Boston 4 all-stars to win, Miami 3 all-stars, and Chicago has just Rose. That should be enough to garner the MVP considerations.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

PD said:


> just think about this. It takes Boston 4 all-stars to win, Miami 3 all-stars, and Chicago has just Rose. That should be enough to garner the MVP considerations.


I think this is kinda the popular belief.

The problem with it, is that both Boozer and Noah would clearly have been all-stars had injuries not occurred.  And if the all-star team was decided less on politics and name-recognition and more on actual player value then Deng would have been an easy pick also. Deng should have made it IMO.

So when I look at the Bulls I think Rose, Deng, Boozer and Noah are all all-star caliber players. Take name-recognition away and just looking at the type of players they are today, then I don't think Bostons 4 all stars are any better collectively then our top 4.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

> In reality Our team has multiple all-star caliber players


So does Golden State, whats the point?


----------



## Bulls96 (Jun 25, 2003)

IMO, the word “valuable” means:

an athlete with extraordinary skills, great possible impact 
to the team success, less amount of compensation requires, 
few “mileage“ .

Today, no one can challenge Rose in all those combined categories.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

I personally think you can make an excellent argument against Rose for mvp as you probably can make against most of the candidates , i didn't hear one from skip, i heard basically nitpicking just to disagree , he sprinkled in some truth to make it sound better , but if you held the same standard against any candidate they would come up short.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> So does Golden State, whats the point?


The point is that saying that Rose was Chicago's only All-Star, and that makes him the leader for MVP, is a bit misleading, as Rose does have All-Star level players around him, just like other leading contenders for the award.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

jnrjr79 said:


> The point is that saying that Rose was Chicago's only All-Star, and that makes him the leader for MVP, is a bit misleading, as Rose does have All-Star level players around him, just like other leading contenders for the award.


Well the way I look at it is Rose play's with less talent than every other MVP caliber player in the league. The whole all-star thing is silly but there is no doubt that Rose has done more with less. 

The only arguments I would make against Rose for MVP would be his shooting percentage, he is shooting under 45% and usually you like your MVP's to shoot in the high 40's. The only player who won the MVP in recent memory shooting under 40% was Allen Iverson, Rose is at 44% so I like his chances.


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well the way I look at it is Rose play's with less talent than every other MVP caliber player in the league. The whole all-star thing is silly but there is no doubt that Rose has done more with less.
> 
> The only arguments I would make against Rose for MVP would be his shooting percentage, he is shooting under 45% and usually you like your MVP's to shoot in the high 40's. The only player who won the MVP in recent memory shooting under 40% was Allen Iverson, Rose is at 44% so I like his chances.


iverson shot .420 in his mvp season....and to be honest he never deserved it over shaq...shaq was the best player in the league and he played for the best team...that shaq has only won it once is a travesty.

i would say the biggest case against rose is history and advanced stats.
in the last 20 years only nash has finished outside the top 8 in PER and won the mvp(rose is currently 12th)

only once in the last 20 years has a player won the mvp and his team wasn't top 3 in wins (once again nash 4th,rose also currently 4th)

point guards are usually expected to shoot lower fg% than other positions they are generally the smallest guys on the floor, and often have to take more difficult shots as the shot clock is ticking down. its not something that should be held against him unless it was low for his position...which i dont believe it is, although it is lower than most of the top point guards in the league who shoot for the most part very high % for the position.


----------



## girllovesthegame (Nov 3, 2005)

PD said:


> just think about this. It takes Boston 4 all-stars to win, Miami 3 all-stars, and *Chicago has just Rose.* That should be enough to garner the MVP considerations.



You almost sound like Jazz fans. Discounting other really good players on the team to prop up Rose. Jazz fans hardly ever gave Boozer, Kirilenko credit because it would make Deron Williams look better. Rose is great but Boozer, Noah, and Deng are hardly scrubs. No, they may not be future Hall of Famers but they are by no means scrubs. And yes, Rose will most likely be MVP this season.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> iverson shot .420 in his mvp season....and to be honest he never deserved it over shaq...shaq was the best player in the league and he played for the best team...that shaq has only won it once is a travesty.


Well Kobe only won it once also which shocks me but thats the problem with the MVP award, there is no clear definition of who it should go to every year. 



> i would say the biggest case against rose is history and advanced stats.
> in the last 20 years only nash has finished outside the top 8 in PER and won the mvp(rose is currently 12th)
> 
> only once in the last 20 years has a player won the mvp and his team wasn't top 3 in wins (once again nash 4th,rose also currently 4th)


Its hard to go on PER because for the most part its a stat dominated by the bigger players. 9 of the top 10 PER players this year are forwards, guy's who are 6'9 and up. As for PG's Derron is playing on a terrible team putting up huge numbers, Paul is putting up decent numbers on an average team and Westbrook is having a fantastic season playing #2 next to the leagues leading scorer, I can't judge Rose by PER when he is clearly much more important to his own team than the rest of those guys. 

The whole team record one is an interesting stat since the the top 10 PER guy's aren't playing on any of the top 3 winning teams. I think its down to Rose, Howard and Lebron, I just don't see how PER will factor in this year, it will probably come down to which players team ends up with the most wins. Some stats just can't show you how valuable Rose is to the Bulls.

point guards are usually expected to shoot lower fg% than other positions they are generally the smallest guys on the floor, and often have to take more difficult shots as the shot clock is ticking down. its not something that should be held against him unless it was low for his position...which i dont believe it is, although it is lower than most of the top point guards in the league who shoot for the most part very high % for the position.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Da Grinch (Aug 17, 2002)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well Kobe only won it once also which shocks me but thats the problem with the MVP award, there is no clear definition of who it should go to every year.


generally it goes to a top player on a top team...during the 1st 3peat shaq was the man so he wasn't going to win then over him, and during the lakers resurgence lebron's teams have won a lot of reg. season games and he has led the league in PER both years he won the award



> Its hard to go on PER because for the most part its a stat dominated by the bigger players. 9 of the top 10 PER players this year are forwards, guy's who are 6'9 and up. As for PG's Derron is playing on a terrible team putting up huge numbers, Paul is putting up decent numbers on an average team and Westbrook is having a fantastic season playing #2 next to the leagues leading scorer, I can't judge Rose by PER when he is clearly much more important to his own team than the rest of those guys.
> 
> The whole team record one is an interesting stat since the the top 10 PER guy's aren't playing on any of the top 3 winning teams. I think its down to Rose, Howard and Lebron, I just don't see how PER will factor in this year, it will probably come down to which players team ends up with the most wins. Some stats just can't show you how valuable Rose is to the Bulls.



actually its not, westbrook , lebron , kobe,wade and chris paul are all in the top 10 in PER and under 6'9. 4 of the top 10 are guards so i'm not sure the view that it favors bigger players holds true this season. Dirk's mavs are actually 3rd in wins %(they are actually tied for 2nd in total wins but have more losses than the celts so i consider them 3rd) and he is 9th in PER


----------



## narek (Jul 29, 2005)

Scoop Jackson comes out for Rose, offsetting some of those other ESPN guys:



> I'm not trying to jinx anyone -- especially not him -- but the MVP race is over.
> 
> And the fact that Derrick Rose had to be coaxed to smile after Sunday's win over the Heat provided his final margin of victory. Even after he gave his team one of the most important wins (not the biggest win; there's a significant difference) of his short career, Rose -- in the wake of his "disappointing" 27-point, five-assist performance -- didn't grin until ABC's Heather Cox cajoled one out of him after the Bulls' one-point win over the most hated-on, targeted, under-the-microscope, built-to-win-not-now-but-apparently-right-now team in the NBA, the third time in three tries that Chicago has taken Miami's measure.


http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/nba/columns/story?columnist=jackson_scoop&id=6194122


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Well the way I look at it is Rose play's with less talent than every other MVP caliber player in the league. The whole all-star thing is silly but there is no doubt that Rose has done more with less.


I don't agree with this at all. I mean No way Dwight Howard has more talent around him then Rose. It's not even close. I think Lebron has less talent around him. Durant has less talent around him, Paul certainly does etc...

See Talent shouldn't be judged solely as offensive talent. Which is how I believe you often like to judge players. All the other aspects of the game are tremendously important. Rose happens to have some talented offensive players around him, but also Extremeley talented defenders and rebounders around him. This team is a middle of the pack offense but the best rebounding/defensive team in the NBA. Make no mistake we win overwhelmingly because of defense and rebounding.

That being said I think the MVP is very often given to a player on an excellent team that is most perceived to be a one-man show. I think this year the perception is that Rose is that guy. So I am really pulling for him. But I do think it is clear that this is an extremely well built team, with excellent talent, but most importantly talent that fits together.


----------



## Wade County (Jun 22, 2003)

^ This. Rose's supporting cast is very underrated.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Da Grinch said:


> generally it goes to a top player on a top team...during the 1st 3peat shaq was the man so he wasn't going to win then over him, and during the lakers resurgence lebron's teams have won a lot of reg. season games and he has led the league in PER both years he won the award
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My Bad I'm looking at EFF rating instead of PER rating, EFF ratings are dominated by Bigs and yes Lebron is a big. I have issues with the PER rating but I'm not going to get into that.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> I don't agree with this at all. I mean No way Dwight Howard has more talent around him then Rose. It's not even close. I think Lebron has less talent around him. Durant has less talent around him, Paul certainly does etc...


Umm No, I can give you the Magic since the team has faced a major face lift, but you are out of your mind if you think the Bulls have more talent than the Heat and Thunder, Chris Paul is not even in my MVP discussion so no point in talking about him.



> See Talent shouldn't be judged solely as offensive talent. Which is how I believe you often like to judge players. All the other aspects of the game are tremendously important. Rose happens to have some talented offensive players around him, but also Extremeley talented defenders and rebounders around him. This team is a middle of the pack offense but the best rebounding/defensive team in the NBA. Make no mistake we win overwhelmingly because of defense and rebounding.


If your point is that the Bulls are a good team then yes, I'm not arguing that. While all the rebounding and defense absolutely are reasons why we win, you take Rose off the team and the Bulls are basically Milwaukee a great defensive team that sucks.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Umm No, I can give you the Magic since the team has faced a major face lift, but you are out of your mind if you think the Bulls have more talent than the Heat and Thunder, Chris Paul is not even in my MVP discussion so no point in talking about him.


This is a silly argument to go much further into. But obviously Howard has crap talent around him and it is not comparable to what Rose has. Before or after their "face lift". Lebron has Wade and Bosh and then a bunch of garbage players. Bosh is basically a wash with Boozer. That leaves Wade to account for the entire Roster of Bulls quality players. He doesn't and he certainly doesn't when paired with Lebron. The thunder for the majority of the year had a bad center and a average sf (green) playing pf. You can't win with only perimeter players. (they might have adjusted that but we will see if Perkins is the answer...).

I'm not really out of my mind. If you think Rose is just that much better then Lebron and Durant, that he can carry a far less talented team... then maybe you are the one who is out of his mind? Because see for you to be right then pretty much Rose is significantly better then Lebron and Durant. Do you really believe that?




> If your point is that the Bulls are a good team then yes, I'm not arguing that. While all the rebounding and defense absolutely are reasons why we win, you take Rose off the team and the Bulls are basically Milwaukee a great defensive team that sucks.


Yes the bulls are a very good team. Yes the Bulls are an elite defensive and rebounding team. No the Bulls would not suck without Rose. You always throw this out there like it is a fact. It's not a fact, just an opinion you have with no real substance behind it.

Milwaukee is the 4th best defensive team (def eff) and the 18th best rebounding team (reb rate). They are also dead last in Off eff. So no I don't see how this is a reasonable comparable.

To put it in perspective the Bulls are 1st in rebounding, 1st in Defense, and 17th in offense. So basically you think if we took Rose off this team we would turn into Milwaukee? Lol! how? With only the 17th best offense we are still an elite team. How bad would our offense have to be for our team to be as bad as Milwaukee? 

I'm sorry but you just don't understand what it means to be the best defense _and_ rebounding team in the NBA. This isn't a team that all of a sudden loses 20 wins because of one player. Wake up.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> This is a silly argument to go much further into. But obviously Howard has crap talent around him and it is not comparable to what Rose has. Before or after their "face lift". Lebron has Wade and Bosh and then a bunch of garbage players. Bosh is basically a wash with Boozer. That leaves Wade to account for the entire Roster of Bulls quality players. He doesn't and he certainly doesn't when paired with Lebron. The thunder for the majority of the year had a bad center and a average sf (green) playing pf. You can't win with only perimeter players. (they might have adjusted that but we will see if Perkins is the answer...).


Bosh is a better player than Boozer that was established last year and while hes 3rd fiddle in Miami hes still a better talent than Boozer. Wade is arguably better than even Rose and Lebron is the best player in the game so yeah the Heat have better talent. Thunder have better talent also. I'm not gonna get into this topic any further because its clear and obvious. 



> I'm not really out of my mind. If you think Rose is just that much better then Lebron and Durant, that he can carry a far less talented team... then maybe you are the one who is out of his mind? Because see for you to be right then pretty much Rose is significantly better then Lebron and Durant. Do you really believe that?


LOL wow you are really grasping at anything huh.

For your argument to be relevant I would have to have the opinion that Lebron and Durant CAN'T carry a team on their own, the fact is they can. But that still does not change the fact that they are playing with better talent than Derrick Rose, out of all the MVP caliber players IMO Derrick has done the most with less, its also an opinion shared by MANY. Please don't get this confused in your head and turn this into Rose play's with garbage, cause I'm not saying that. 




> Yes the bulls are a very good team. Yes the Bulls are an elite defensive and rebounding team. No the Bulls would not suck without Rose. You always throw this out there like it is a fact. It's not a fact, just an opinion you have with no real substance behind it.


Yes they would. 



> Milwaukee is the 4th best defensive team (def eff) and the 18th best rebounding team (reb rate). They are also dead last in Off eff. So no I don't see how this is a reasonable comparable.


The Bulls are what 16th in offense with Derrick Rose averaging 25 and 8, take him off the team and they would be even worse. 



> To put it in perspective the Bulls are 1st in rebounding, 1st in Defense, and 17th in offense. So basically you think if we took Rose off this team we would turn into Milwaukee? Lol! how? With only the 17th best offense we are still an elite team. How bad would our offense have to be for our team to be as bad as Milwaukee?


You are failing to even consider and sort of trickle down effect Rose's absence would create. They are also worse defensively without Rose, Rose is a better defender than CJ Watson, Rose does most of the work offensively which gives guy's like Noah, Boozer and Deng active rest at times but asking them to carry a greater offensive load will show negative effects defensively. 



> I'm sorry but you just don't understand what it means to be the best defense _and_ rebounding team in the NBA. This isn't a team that all of a sudden loses 20 wins because of one player. Wake up.


FYI Minnesota is the best rebounding team in the NBA.

Well you just don't understand the game of basketball then, The Cav's last year were top ten in almost every major statistical category, they had the 4th best defensive FG%... Look at them now.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

Here is the link for you check the stats... Maybe you will better appreciate the team aspect of basketball: http://espn.go.com/nba/hollinger/teamstats/_/sort/defensiveEff/order/false

*FYI Minnesota is not the best rebounding team in the NBA... they just play at the fastest pace and thus get the most stats. But if you don't understand rebound rate, you could always look at rebound differential: http://espn.go.com/nba/statistics/team/_/stat/rebounds-per-game/sort/avgReboundsDifference

Where we are also first by a very large margin. Meaning when teams play us, on average, they get out-rebounded by 5.4 rebounds. When teams play Minnesota they only get out-rebounded by 2.8 rebounds.

Get it?

As for me not understanding the game of basketball... just stay on topic, I couldn't care less about your evaluation of basketball minds.


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> As for me not understanding the game of basketball... just stay on topic, I couldn't care less about your evaluation of basketball minds.


I'm just showing you that its VERY possible for a team to lose 20 games as a result of losing their best player.


----------



## caseyrh (Jun 10, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I'm just showing you that its VERY possible for a team to lose 20 games as a result of losing their best player.


OK...


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

caseyrh said:


> OK...


Ok then.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> I'm just showing you that its VERY possible for a team to lose 20 games as a result of losing their best player.



Maybe we need to define what a "bad" team is absent Derrick. It's possible the Bulls could lose 20 more games and still be a bottom seed in the playoffs. That's arguable as to whether that's a "bad" team, though certainly not a good one.


----------



## jnrjr79 (Apr 18, 2003)

thebizkit69u said:


> Umm No, I can give you the Magic since the team has faced a major face lift, but you are out of your mind if you think the Bulls have more talent than the Heat and Thunder



Interestingly, there is an article in Slate today which takes the opposite position, stating that talent is precisely the problem with Miami.



> Miami Heat Players Are Crying Because Most of Them Play Basketball Poorly
> Posted Wednesday, March 09, 2011 3:41 PM | By Tom Scocca
> 
> 
> ...



More at the link.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/scocca/


----------



## JonH818 (Aug 31, 2006)

Hey Skip Bayless, Kobe misses numerous shots and loses the ball in key moments, is he now no longer your MVP you idiot. You based your Derrick Rose comments on Derrick losing the ball and shooting an airball against the Heat and the Bulls WIN. Kobe misses numerous shots and loses the ball and they LOSE.......what now Skip?


----------



## TwinkieTowers (Jul 16, 2002)

Why are we recycling the "Without Rose..." debate? We all know that Bulls would still be a playoff team.


----------



## Diable (Apr 26, 2005)

The bulls without Rose would still win their division and end up with home court in the first round of the playoffs. Of course their division sucks and they'd win it because they'd still be beating all those ****ty teams pretty much every time they played.


----------



## theokuang (Jan 18, 2011)

some are exactly!! some not!!


----------



## JonH818 (Aug 31, 2006)

New Video regarding MVP: http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=6223434


----------



## thebizkit69u (Feb 12, 2003)

Man Skip really does not like Rose lol, hes still calling for Kobe to win it.


----------



## Job (Feb 28, 2011)

Take that Skip.:twoguns:


----------

