Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Nevin Shapiro Vows To Bring Down Miami

Competition Discussion: Chicago Bulls

(Previously: Atlanta, Boston, Charlotte).

The season is still a ways away, but most of the rosters are set, barring the requisite Michael Jordan comeback rumor (just kidding, but only a little).  We have an idea where our team stands, but we can't really know unless we discuss everyone else.  In that spirit, I'm going to throw up a "competition discussion" thread for each of the other 29 teams over the next couple months or so.  We'll go in alphabetical order from A to Z.  Today's team: Chicago.  Jump to the comments to discuss the Bulls and make a prediction on their record.


Last year's record: 41-41 (Pythagorean record: 40-42)

Playoffs: Lost to Boston 4-3 in first round

Offensive Rating: 108.4 (14th)

Defensive Rating: 108.7 (18th)

Pace: 93.1 possessions/game (9th)

In: Jannero Pargo, James Johnson, Taj Gibson
Out: Ben Gordon, Tim Thomas, Linton Johnson

Projected starting lineup: Derrick Rose, John Salmons, Luol Deng, Tyrus Thomas, Joakim Noah

Key themes:

  • What type of progression will we see from Derrick Rose this year?
  • How wise was it to let Ben Gordon walk in free agency?  What will the effect of that loss be?
  • Was their hot stretch down the stretch last year after the trade for John Salmons and Brad Miller a mirage or a sign of things to come? 
  • What's the long-term plan here?  Are they punting the season and hoping to strike it rich in the 2010 free agent market?  How wise is that?
  • How healthy is Luol Deng?  Can he go back to being a rising star in this league after two subpar seasons?
  • John Salmons posted a 59.6 TS% in his 26 games with Chicago.  His career TS% is 54.4%.  Will we see a regression back to the mean, or is Salmons' shot just that improved?
  • Tyrus Thomas will be a restricted free agent after the year.  What's his future in Chicago?  Will he display some actual consistency this year
  • How much has Vinny Del Negro grown as a coach?  Can he rise to competency before his contract runs out after next year?  Will he cost the team wins like he did last year?

Star-divide

Last year, the Bulls nearly knocked off the defending champion Celtics in a classic Round 1 series that had everyone in the basketball world buzzing, whether it was pseudo-analysts who barely tune into the NBA until the playoffs or guys who follow the game every day.  Four games went into overtime or deeper, and a fifth was decided at the buzzer in regulation.  It was one of the top playoff series of the decade by any measure, that's for sure. 

Naturally, the overwhelmingly positive opinion of the young Bulls has carried over from their near-miss against the defending champs.  One ESPN panelist even said the Bulls would win 55 games (!) this year.  I'm glad I can be here for a reality check.

Fact: The Celtics were decimated by injuries to Kevin Garnett and Leon Powe and were nowhere near the team that won 62 games in the regular season.

Fact: The Bulls lost their leading scorer from last year, letting him walk for absolutely nothing.  Unless you consider Janerro Pargo an adequate replacement for Ben Gordon. 

The Bulls are therefore hoping for the following things to happen in order for them to become an upper-eschelon Eastern Conference team, despite being hopelessly mediocre last year (a fast finish against a really soft schedule doesn't mean a sign of things to come); losing to a Celtics team missing its best player and its best reserve; and letting their leading scorer in both the regular season and the playoffs leave for nothing. 

  • Derrick Rose takes a Kevin Durant-like step into superstardom: Rose was very good for a 20-year old rookie last year, but in terms of tangible production, he was merely slightly above-average.  Slightly above-average for a 20-year old rookie is the equivalent of a 28-year old being an all-NBA second-teamer, but it's still a big jump into superstardom for Rose.  Not to mention that he must do that without his leading scorer taking pressure off defenders.  Without Gordon, Rose will be under pressure to create nearly every play, and that may not exactly be the optimal on-court situation needed for development into a superstar.
  • Vinny Del Negro improves to being an above-average coach: The late-season soft schedule and the Salmons/Brad Miller trade salvaged VDN's first year, but he still was unable to design a diverse enough offense to take advantage of more of his players' skills.  The once-proud Bulls defense also faltered, and VDN embarrassed himself a couple times by running out of timeouts in key close playoff games.  He'll have to improve quick; he's only on a two-year contract and the Bulls' early-season circus road trip is an immediate challenge.
  • Hope Luol Deng returns fully healthy: Deng's been nicked up the past two years, missing 19 games in 07/08 and 33 last season (40 if you include the playoffs).  Gordon's departure opens up the small forward position for him, but he has to prove he can stay healthy to seize the position back.  Even when he was healthy last year, he massively struggled to fit into VDN's "system." 
  • Hope John Salmons adequately replaces Gordon: Salmons was a very good player in his time with the Bulls, but you'd be hard-pressed to expect the career 54.4 TS% shooter to match his 59.6% TS% in his Bulls tenure. 
  • Hope Tyrus Thomas becomes a consistently reliable player, despite jerking around his minutes, taking him further away from the basket and sitting him in crunch time so Brad Miller can guard perimeter-oriented power forwards: Yeah, good luck with that.  Thomas is Chicago's Andray Blatche -- a talented, but inconsistent player about whom Bulls fans argue incessantly over whether his lack of development is his fault or his coaches' fault.  The end result is that nobody wins ... again.   
  • Hope rookie forwards James Johnson and Taj Gibson contribute something: Expecting the 16th and 26th picks in the draft to help much as rookies means you probably aren't as good as you think you are.

Long-term, it seems the Bulls are shooting for 2010.  They have just $37 million in committed salaries for next year and could have even more room if Salmons opts out and Thomas is renounced.  The 2010 free agent class is large and the Bulls have more talent than most teams in the sweepstakes, but you have to wonder why they didn't just use their expiring contracts to make a big move and surround a key superstar with both Rose and Gordon.  Either way, that's water under the bridge.  The whole strategy could work out marvelously and we could all be lauding the long-term patience of the Bulls front office by the start of the 2010/11 season.

For next year, though, the bottom line is expecting anything more than .500 out of this squad means you expect nearly every hope to break their way.  In fact, I think you could argue none of the hopes break their way, meaning they essentially punted a season in order to get under the cap.  That worked out really well for them in 2000, right?

Mike's prediction: 39-43, third in the central, 9th in the East.

Team Mike Prada JakeTheSnake Truth About It Rook6980 bwoodsxyz
Atlanta 47-35 44-38 45-37 45-37 45-37
Boston 57-25 55-27 54-28 44-38 56-26
Charlotte 32-50 32-50 29-53 34-48
Chicago 39-43 40-42 42-40 40-42 44-38

Comment 36 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Well Put

Deron Williams’ PER jumped 4.7 points from his 1st year to his 2nd (12.4 to 15.1) and the Jazz improved by 10 wins to 51 … but he also had a better supporting cast in both seasons with Boozer playing 74 games in D-Will’s year two (instead of 33 in yr. 1), and Paul Millsap joining the team in year two as well.

Derrick Rose’s career as a player will probably be better than Williams’ (16.0 PER in year one), but I just don’t see his supporting cast being tough/experienced enough for him to lead the team through growing pains.

The Bulls will challenge teams night in and night out, but without anyone else who can really create on their own, teams will focus on Rose, and VDN’s coaching inexperience will cost Chicago close wins.

I don’t think they will be worse than last year, but there definitely won’t be much improvement.

Win Prediction: 42 games.

Representing DC with Wizards & Stuff - Truth About It.net and Bullets Forever.

by Kyle Weidie on Sep 8, 2009 1:53 PM EDT reply actions  

"but without anyone else who can really create their own (offense)" is the key here

I know I’m going to be in the minority on this, but I actually think their offense will be fine without Ben Gordon. He was great, I know, but he also stopped ball movement and was a bit of a liability on defense. Rose is going to be a monster next year, since even if he shoots the same as he did, he’ll probably get a few more fta per game due to not being a rookie anymore, so his true shooting percentage will rise. Also, Deng can create a bit and will give undersized shooting guards like Delonte West and Randy Foye trouble, while Salmons is a solid 17 or 18 ppg guy in his own right. I think that most of their offense will come from the perimeter, but they’ll be able to score enough points to win a lot of games. They’re also very deep, with the underrated Brad Miller and Kirk Hinrich coming off the bench. They could use another big man, but they’re actually pretty much set, and they were basically a 50 win caliber team last year after the trade to bring in Salmons and Miller. They’re still that team now, just with Gordon being replaced by Deng, so I’m guessing they’ll win around 45 or 47 if they can stay relatively healthy.

by pantslessyoda1 on Sep 8, 2009 8:02 PM EDT up reply actions  

The Bulls will feature a quick and athletic team, lead by Rookie of the Year Derrick Rose. Now, with the defection of Ben Gordon (the team’s high scorer from last year), the Bulls will probably go with a three-guard rotation of Derrick Rose, John Salmons, and Kirk Hinrich – with Hinrich rotating between PG and SG. Rose should improve on his stellar rookie season, simply by the fact that he’s been through it all now. Hinrich and Rose didn’t always play well together last year, but that must change this year or the Bulls will be in trouble. Hinrich has played off the ball before, so I think he should be able to make the adjustment.

A big question is whether Luol Deng can bounce back from two injury plagued years and return to his 2006-07 form. After a 2007-08 season that saw Deng miss 19 games due to various injuries (Back, Achillies Tendon, etc…), he missed 34 games in 2007-08 due to Toe and Ankle injuries and finally a Stress Fracture in his Tibia shut him down for the rest of the year.

If Chicago has any hope of returning to the Playoffs and making noise, Deng will have to stay healthy all year; otherwise the loss of Gordon’s scoring will be too much to overcome.

Chicago’s bigs don’t thrill me. Between Joakim Noah’s complete lack of an Offensive game, the inconsistency of Tyrus Thomas, and the fact that Brad Miller plays like a 7-foot Shooting Guard; Chicago doesn’t have much down low. Chicago has been waiting almost as long for Thomas to blossom as Wizard’s fans have been waiting on Andray Blatche. This is a make or break year for Thomas in Chicago. If he doesn’t show something this year, he won’t be back in the Windy City next year.

Now if you could combine Noah’s energy, with Thomas’ athleticism and Miller’s skills – you’d really have something. As a matter of fact, the only thing that Chicago really lacks to get to the next level is an All-Star quality big man. Add a low post threat (like Stoudemire or Bosh or even Antawn Jamison) and this team could get out of the first round and possibly contend for the Eastern Conference.

They drafted a couple of young bigs, James Johnson and Taj Gibson, but neither of them will get enough playing time to help; nor should they.

Even with Gordon gone – the return of Deng and the anticipated improvements in Derrick Rose’s game should be enough to give Chicago a reasonable chance to get close to last year’s record.

Prediction: 40-42, Second in the Central

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Sep 8, 2009 2:40 PM EDT reply actions  

Even with an Amare...

they wouldn’t have enough offense (or good enough coaching) to challenge for the East. I think you’re under-estimating how hard it’s going to be for them to score.

by RamV on Sep 8, 2009 7:44 PM EDT up reply actions  

40-42

They’ll miss Gordon, but Rose will improve enough to keep the team from going backwards.

Bullets Forever: A blog dedicated to the Washington Wizards with analysis, commentary, and more YouTube videos than your eyes can handle.

by Jake Whitacre on Sep 8, 2009 3:07 PM EDT reply actions  

Not really Bulls related comment...

I’d like to ask perhaps a rhetorical question: Do we have a case of the “grass is greener on the other side” outlook in terms of looking at the production of studs like Derrick Rose and Kevin Durant, compared to our own JaVale McGee?

Let me get this out of the way first: It has been slightly bothersome to me every time I see praise lavished on those other studs, but not for McGee. This is a recent phenomenon for me and it actually only developed during the Team USA mini-camp when JaVale more than held his own against everyone else.

Mike, your “slightly above average comment” for Rose is entirely applicable to McGee IMO. Yet even though we all recognize JaVale’s immense talent, most of us here on the boards knock him for some stuff or another and I think most of us all agree that McGee won’t get anywhere near the amount of minutes this year.

We sit here and speculate on how McGee may not even play 15 mpg this year, yet JaVale is the same age as Durant and Rose and JaVale’s PER was higher than the other two guys in their rookie years (and comparable to Dwight’s rookie PER).

Why is this? Did we all get brainwashed by Tapscott last year? Because JaVale averaged only a meager 15 mpg for a sorry 19-win team last year, he couldn’t possibly be anywhere near the level of a Rose or Durant?

Bottom line is that I don’t think JaVale gets the recognition that the other guys gets, even from us diehard Wizards fans. Why is this? I don’t really have an answer here.

On topic: great post and comments as usual. I also think the Bulls will be right at .500 this year.

by formula0 on Sep 8, 2009 3:10 PM EDT reply actions  

Recognition

Just to clarify my comment about JaVale not getting the recognition of the other guys. I don’t mean recognition as in the casual fan or even non-Wizards fan recognizing JaVale and putting him on equal footing with Derrick Rose or Kevin Durant, or even Oden. Obviously, those other players were drafted at the top of their classes and have had extensive media coverage throughout their careers, unlike McGee.

My comment on recognition is about recognizing that JaVale is the same age, put up a higher PER, and so people, especially Wizard fans should not discount JaVale’s potential to improve just as quickly, and take that next step to superstardom just like what Durant has done, and possibly what Rose is capable of doing this year.

On this board, we have a tendency to talk more about JaVale being the second big off the bench this year, yet we don’t hesitate to say Rose is going to be a superstar.

by formula0 on Sep 8, 2009 3:17 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think you're displaying a bit of Homer-ism

I think McG is pretty lavishly lauded around here for his potential. If he takes the next step, he’ll still be a step behind Rose and Durant. He just has farther to go than those guys at this point.

by MR on Sep 8, 2009 3:52 PM EDT up reply actions  

You're possibly right

I definitely may be displaying a bit of Homer-ism. I think I’m just wondering aloud, again being a bit on the rhetorical side…forgive me, there’s not much else happening in the NBA at the moment!

Conceptually you’re totally right. Durant is possibly going to be an MVP within the next 5 years, and its less likely McGee will ever be an MVP no matter how much he ends up developing. But isn’t production, production? If McGee’s PER is higher, doesn’t that mean his per-minute statistical production was greater than Rose or Durant? I can’t answer that, and that frankly wasn’t my point in my original comments.

Where I was getting at was this. Prada said this about Rose: “Slightly above-average for a 20-year old rookie is the equivalent of a 28-year old being an all-NBA second-teamer”

Have we ever said that about McGee? I don’t think we have (I could be wrong). If we have said that, then I’d say that we have a 28-year old All-NBA 2nd Teamer sitting behind Haywood and Blatche….

Sorry again for taking this totally off-topic :)

by formula0 on Sep 8, 2009 4:25 PM EDT up reply actions  

I think you’re putting way too much faith in PER.

And playing 15 minutes per game vs. playing 35 minutes per game are very different things.

Not sure of the logic behind this:

If we have said that, then I’d say that we have a 28-year old All-NBA 2nd Teamer sitting behind Haywood and Blatche….

by MR on Sep 8, 2009 4:36 PM EDT up reply actions  

Don't disagree with anything you said

Also, the second part of your last comment re: the logic behind

“If we have said that, then I’d say that we have a 28-year old All-NBA 2nd Teamer sitting behind Haywood and Blatche….”

A PER of 15.0 is the league average. Players with a PER of 15.0 and higher is above league average and 15.0 and below is below league average.

Re-read what Mike wrote about Derrick Rose being slightly above average: “Rose was very good for a 20-year old rookie last year, but in terms of tangible production, he was merely slightly above-average. Slightly above-average for a 20-year old rookie is the equivalent of a 28-year old being an all-NBA second-teamer, but it’s still a big jump into superstardom for Rose”

I was half-jokingly applying what Mike said to JaVale because JaVale was also a 20-year old rookie that posted a higher than league average PER, so are we saying then McGee is a 28-year old All NBA 2nd team player? :)

FWIW I’m not disagreeing with Mike at all, Derrick Rose is a stud.

by formula0 on Sep 8, 2009 4:43 PM EDT up reply actions  

I wasn't just talking about PER with Rose

I was also talking about his scoring, assist and percentages in relation to other point guards. All that factors into PER a bit, but I separate it out to account for certain statistics being more important for guards than big men, etc.

In essence, I don’t think a straight PER comparison between a big and a small works. They play different roles. Even though McGee had a strong PER, he wasn’t as good in the traditional big man stats. I’d expect him to have a higher TS% if he was really going to be a superstar, and his REB% was okay, but should be better for a guy with his athleticism. He got his high PER doing stuff that seem less important for big men to do.

Factor in defense (a problem for Rose, but a bigger problem for McGee because he’s a big man), and I don’t think it’s a fair comparison.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Sep 8, 2009 4:56 PM EDT up reply actions  

That makes sense

PER does seem weighted more towards bigs so that makes a lot of sense.

by formula0 on Sep 8, 2009 7:15 PM EDT up reply actions  

The words “tangible production” make an appearance too. That is heavily weighted to Rose/Durant over McG.

by MR on Sep 8, 2009 7:23 PM EDT up reply actions  

Well, not really

Tangible production is something McGee does fine. It’s the stuff that’s more difficult to measure (his effect on team defense, etc) where he falls a bit short.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Sep 9, 2009 12:46 PM EDT up reply actions  

25.3 pts 6.5 reb 2.8 assts 1.3 steals .7 blks per game
16.8 pts 3.9 reb 6.3 assts .8 steals .2 blks per game

6.5 pts 3.9 reb .3 assts .4 steals 1.0 blks per game

That’s what I thought you meant by tangible.

by MR on Sep 9, 2009 1:09 PM EDT up reply actions  

Guess I misunderstood your entire point then.

I thought you meant tangible as in ‘not potential, not extrapolated’.

IMHO scoring 20 points per 36 while playing limited time and scoring 20 points per 36 while playing an actual 36 minutes are very different things.

by MR on Sep 9, 2009 2:10 PM EDT up reply actions  

Tangible means production that can be measured

Essentially, tangible=personal stats. Per-game vs. per-36 matters not because studies show most players improve most of their individual stats (rate or efficiency stats) when they get more time. (This is just one study I could find that corresponded to PER, but there are others).

The “intangible” then is stuff that’s more difficult to measure. For example, a player’s impact on team defense, his work ethic, his ability to play hard, his on-court IQ, his positioning on offense, etc. Stuff where the answer is more simple that citing a number. In those areas, McGee falls well, well short of Rose and Durant, not in his stats

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Sep 9, 2009 2:26 PM EDT up reply actions  

On the contrary ...

I think McGee has been getting recognition … and before his USA mini-camp invite … at least among some of the general NBA blogs that I read.

That being said, JaVale still has a long way to go, and must put together a significant string of consistent efforts before getting true league-wide recognition.

So far, in my opinion, he seems to be on a nice pace.

Representing DC with Wizards & Stuff - Truth About It.net and Bullets Forever.

by Kyle Weidie on Sep 8, 2009 5:07 PM EDT up reply actions  

Defense is an issue

Despite the blocks he’s a major liability on defense. Maybe that gets solved this year, maybe it doesn’t, but until it does you’ll hear “potential” attached to his name rather than “all-star”.

by RamV on Sep 8, 2009 7:48 PM EDT up reply actions  

WS

I struggled with the assumptions for this one. Starting with the 40-42 pythagorean:

Deng’s value the last two seasons has been nothing like in 06-07, mostly because he hasn’t shot anything like that well again. I’ll just split the difference between that level and last year’s, giving them 3 more wins.

Nocioni was awful last year. If he returns to merely kind of overrated, that’s another 1 or 2 wins.

Losing Gordon was bigger than I thought. They should replace him with Salmons. I’m hoping Del Negro replaces him with Pargo instead. I’ll assume it is Salmons, subtract only one win (or could even be less). (If they insist on playing Pargo, it looks much worse.) -1

My gut was that I agreed with Prada’s assessment, but I’ll have to instead say 44-38.

by bwoodsxyz on Sep 8, 2009 3:21 PM EDT reply actions  

Well in that case

I actually don’t change anything. There are several ways for them to replace the “productivity” he brought last year. The only obvious way to get less out of the lineup with his loss is that maybe they’ll be tempted to play Salmons at SF, leading to some Pargo at SG, which would be a significant net loss, and pretty much knock it down to 40 wins or less. But, I’ll stick with 44.

by bwoodsxyz on Sep 8, 2009 3:29 PM EDT up reply actions  

And Deng’s terrible two seasons could be related to the miriad of injuries he suffered the last two years. His last completely (or mostly) healthy year was 2006-07….

Now – in order to get better than 40 wins……. Deng must stay healthy. Rose will have to take the next step. Salmons must take another step (to help offset Gordon’s loss on Offense). Tyrus Thomas has to become more consistent.l Del Negro must become a better Coach AND the Bull’s bigs must play at least to their capabilities…. I don’t think all those things will happen… hence my 40-42 prediction.

Bullets Forever - where "Dagger ! " happens......

by Rook6980 on Sep 8, 2009 3:30 PM EDT up reply actions  

Full Disclaimer: I really dislike the (current) Bulls

Prediction: 36-46

It seems that everyone is counting on Derrick Rose, Luol Deng and John Salmons to save the Bulls. Rose is probably going to step up next year, but my money is on Salmons returning to the mean, and Deng proving to be Luol Deng – a guy who can’t score to save his life if he’s got a hand in his face. He’s really made a career out of that 1 playoff series against the Heat when the Heat’s defense was “Guard everybody but Luol Deng”.

The Bulls have nothing in the frontcourt, a terrible coach, they just lost their best scorer who covered for the offensive inadequacies of the entire team and really one player (Rose) with star potential, and he’s going into his second year. I really like Rose, but that doesn’t mean he’s not gonna have a sophomore slump season.

Honestly, this team looks like the Wizards the first year Gilbert played here – up and coming point guard, one or two serviceable veteran pieces and a whole bunch of garbage. And THAT team only won 25 games. I’m giving the Bulls an extra nine because they defend better.

The Washington Wizards: providing career scoring nights for unknown opposing bench players since 2004.

by mamemimo on Sep 8, 2009 6:31 PM EDT reply actions  

i don't know what to make of the bulls

losing gordon with no significant addition has to hurt them, right? i’d put the over/under for them at 38 wins, unless the rest of the conference is worse than expected.

i wonder if the memphis scandal will affect rose this year. probably not.

i like del negro and salmons. not sure why.

by DarrellWalkerFan on Sep 8, 2009 7:37 PM EDT reply actions  

Solid team

Losing Gordon hurts, but I think they still have a pretty solid team overall. I’d estimate 43 wins for this crew behind Rose. Removing Gordon will actually help Rose’s development because he’s now the unquestioned star of the team, and the NBA makes a concerted effort to enhance its superstars’ performance, which is why this…

Without Gordon, Rose will be under pressure to create nearly every play, and that may not exactly be the optimal on-court situation needed for development into a superstar.
is not true, even though it should be. Being the go-to guy on every play enhances those counting stats everyone is so in love with — and once the fans think you’re great, you benefit from a whole different type of officiating.

by steadyhand on Sep 9, 2009 5:07 PM EDT reply actions  

What does everyone think of . . .

the chances Hinrich being traded in the middle of the season (to anyone). It’s been much talked about how difficult it is for him and Rose to mesh. Maybe a good deal by Paxson makes the team 5-6 wins better than some of you are projecting? And what about the possibility of Del Negro getting the ax if they get off to a poor start (which might also help the team).

"Would you like to shoot me now or wait till you get home." --- Daffy Duck

by George Templeton on Sep 10, 2009 1:38 PM EDT reply actions  

I doubt they trade Hinrich when they passed on several deals this year

And as far as Del Negro being fired, in-season coaching changes rarely help teams. I remember looking at this after Eddie got fired last year.

You know you'll get devoured by Cheaney, Wallace, and Juwan Howard.

by Mike Prada on Sep 10, 2009 1:53 PM EDT up reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Washington Wizards.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
Randy Wittman Seems to "Get It"

Recent FanPosts

Small
Misusing Vesely
Tumblr_lpbvdtzztv1qc7c5to1_500_small
Best 2012 Draft lottery options?
Steves_small
Attention Mr. Stern - The Big Markets will kill the NBA
Tumblr_lpbvdtzztv1qc7c5to1_500_small
Kaman worth going after?
Small
The Wiz have 4 players worth keeping.
Steve_small
This Is Where I Stand
Stan_marsh_small
Is Kyrie Irving already 'All Star' good?
Unseld_small
Keep the Three Burritoes
Small
Rebuilding the Washington Wizards
Small
Should Wiz try a 2 PG lineup

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >


Editor-In-Chief

Headshot_small Mike Prada

Associate Editor

Small Vanilla Gorilla

248225_small Sean Fagan

Contributors

Jakesbshot_small Jake Whitacre

Mriggs_cartoon_2__small Rook6980

Addingmachine_small bwoodsxyz

Photo_on_2010-12-10_at_10 Bullet Nation in Exile