There is a notion, shared by many, that the Bulls have underachieved. General manager Gar Forman implied as much recently when he refused to give coach Vinny Del Negro a vote of confidence. But it's time to interject a hefty dose of realism into this discussion. Sometimes an outside perspective can be an eye-opener.
''The Bulls are not underachieving,'' ESPN analyst Jeff Van Gundy said. ''They are achieving to where they should be. Don't delude yourself that they are anything more than a 30-32-win team.''
After 33 games, the Bulls are percentage points behind the Milwaukee Bucks for the eighth playoff spot in the Eastern Conference, and that sounds about right to Van Gundy, the former coach of the New York Knicks and Houston Rockets.
''Anybody will tell you they achieved right where they should have last year [when they finished the regular season with a 41-41 record],'' he said. ''They were a .500 team. They almost did too well in the playoffs -- that set up unnatural expectations.''
Yep, in hindsight, the Bulls' gutsy playoff performance, in which they took the Boston Celtics to Game 7 in their first-round series, wasn't necessarily such a good thing. Many people got carried away and overlooked the fact that the Celtics were playing without Kevin Garnett. Then came the offseason, when the organization decided not to re-sign Ben Gordon. A team that loses its top scorer typically takes a step backward.
''[Gordon] was explosive offensively,'' said Van Gundy, who incidentally has been mentioned as a potential replacement for Del Negro. ''He was irreplaceable, unless they did replace him, and they didn't. They are a 30-32-win team without him, and anybody expecting more is overstating their talent level. They are what they are, a mediocre team, because they lost their most irreplaceable player. Don't get me wrong, there is no one to blame for the decision to part ways with Gordon. I'm not saying the decision was wrong. It was a fiscal decision. Sometimes you have to have short-term pain for long-term gain.''
The Bulls' plan all along was to ride out this season and land a big-name free agent in the summer. Not that they ever stated this publicly -- not in so many words. But in allowing Gordon to leave via free agency, it was clear they were gearing up for next year and were content to let this year play out however it might. While there is no guarantee they will be able to land a premier free agent from the 2010 class, at least they had a plan in place.
That plan including Del Negro coaching the team at least through this season. What good could come from deviating from the plan? Although the team's recent improved play seems to have quelled the brouhaha for the time being, the word is out: Del Negro has become a lame duck.
It seems the organization responded to its unrealistic expectations by making the coach a scapegoat. Toward what end? To attach yet another interim label to another coach?
Milwaukee Bucks general manager John Hammond, who hired former Bulls coach Scott Skiles, doesn't see an obvious upside in changing coaches midseason.
''I would think for the most part, things like this do not work,'' Hammond said. ''When changes of this kind are made, most of the time they come with an interim label, and lots of times that creates instability.''
Del Negro has received far more criticism than he deserves from fans and pundits. That his clock management and timeout plays have been a point of contention for some is almost laughable. The Bulls' issues are so much bigger.
But you would expect the organization to see beyond these trivialities. The reality of the situation is that the team simply isn't good enough. Although Derrick Rose seems to have regained his hops and the team clearly missed Tyrus Thomas -- or at least his big body -- when he was out with a broken arm, the Bulls' scoring struggles will continue until they acquire a scorer or two.
''There is too much emphasis put on coaches,'' said Indiana Pacers broadcaster Bobby ''Slick'' Leonard, a former player and coach. ''The emphasis should be on the players. The question is: Is the talent level enough to win? The guys on the floor have to do it. Doc Rivers won 24 games [in 2006-07] with the Celtics. Then he gets Kevin Garnett, and he wins the championship. So this stuff about blaming everything on the coach is a bunch of baloney.''
Whether the Bulls are a 30-win team, as Van Gundy suggested, or even a 45-win team, it's clear they will not sniff a championship without an infusion of talent. Didn't everyone know this heading into the season? Surely Forman, operations head John Paxson and chairman Jerry Reinsdorf knew. Didn't they?
Posts
