http://m.espn.go.com/nba/rankings?year=2014&week=-1&src=desktop Bulls45-37 The respect (fear?) Las Vegas has for Derrick Rose always impresses me. The Bulls' visit to Miami on opening night will mark Rose's first game in 549 days, but you won't find Chicago lower than third or fourth in the Sin City sports books when it comes to ranking 2013-14 championship odds.
This strikes me as a very ESPNey power rankings. The "it" teams are high on the list with Indiana at 2, the Nets at 3, the Clippers at 4, and the Rockets at 6. If I was gambling, I put my money on the Thunder, Spurs and Bulls as three teams that will end the season higher than where they are ranked. Thoughts?
We had a thread a while ago along these lines and I think I had the Bulls 5th in the east. These power rankings have them 4th. I had the Knicks ahead of them. So I don't find these too far off. When did Indy become an "it" team?
ESPN also has a player rankings thing going on and Kirk made 183rd best player ahead of numerous players I think are way better. That'd put him at 7th best man on all but the top 3 teams in the league.
I think Indiana became an "it" team when it played the Heat tough in the playoffs last year. As to the Hinrich rating, I'm with you. He's certainly not the 183rd best player on the court. I can understand the rating though. Franchises seem to value him for his leadership, especially those that have young point guards. I don't think we can tell if this is a valid reason to rank Hinrich that high -- we're not in the locker room -- I'm just saying that more than one franchise seems to feel that way. Regardless, leadership isn't a good reason for the Bulls to sign him.
What I saw was player after player on other teams going at Hinrich and scoring over him. He had trouble staying in front of modern PGs. I never did like the way he ran an offense. Dribble around until there's :04 on the clock and you will get 6 assists per game when someone forces up a 30% chance shot and makes it. He's had trouble shooting the ball for his last three teams. A PER over 10 for the first time in 3 seasons and that was a struggle. So if he's not good on defense anymore and not really good at running an offense, where is the value? I realize he is good at one thing, which is not turning the ball over; that is good. If you want to play a really slow paced game where you use most of the :24 clock, he's OK at PG for that. Interestingly, Marco Belinelli was 187. Darrin Collison at 190. Two guys I didn't have to scroll very far who I think are better. I'd rank Kirk with Mike Miller and Devin Harris in the 200s.
