“Back to Chris Duhon sucking as a Bull and how much I hated it.”

I think he was saying Duhon was THAT bad a player.

The shooting I’m not sure about, the overall tone I got was that Duhon is horribly inefficient at everything.

Everything I’ve read is that Skiles disliked Duhon (literally didn’t care for him), and was reluctant to play him. I’ve read several articles citing Skiles refusal to play Duhon more last season when his teammates felt he was the team’s best PG as a major reason for all the “chemistry problems” Chicago had last season.

Duhon has not played as well over his career as Hinrich, so I don’t necessarily agree with the Bulls players.

But Duhon has averaged 25.8 mpg on his career while Hinrich has gotten 35.2. He’s clearly the back-up and has always been Chicago’s 3rd guard at best. This blog is nothing more than an emotional rant, which is fine. I mean it’s this person’s blog and they can rant about whatever they want… I was just pointing out what it was.

Imagine if Bullsblogger had to endure the likes of Marbury, Randolph, Jeffries, Q, or James for more than one season…

Their most preferred style of play is to play like nasty, un-wiped ass.

(Perhaps he’d like him more if Duhon had a problem with Jews?)

Of all the ones above, the Sixers with AI might be a good example of what the Knicks are doing. They had an aging star in their backcourt who, even though he can still play, wasn’t in their plans and hadn’t been helping their team win. They get rid of him and replace him with a PG who fits better with what they’re trying to do.
Andre Miller is better than Chris Duhon (and probably AI, as well, Owen will point out that Berri predicted the Sixers would improve by replacing AI with Miller by exactly the number of wins they did improve). Maybe if along with replacing Marbury with Duhon the Knicks play within an offense and replace the tremendous number of shots taken last season by tremendously inefficient Randolph and Crawford with more efficient scorers like Curry, Lee, and Danilo they can experience a similar boost from parting ways with their former “franchise player” (playing a little defense wouldn’t hurt either).
That’s all assuming they part ways with Marbury.

re: BullsBlogger

I’m not particularly impressed my the quality of that post/comment/whatever. Not once does the writer reference a statistic to support any point he makes. Duhon is a terrible shooter, yet he shoots respectably well. He’s a terrible passer, yet he also passes respectably. It would also be important to note that in 05-06 and 06-07 he was a significantly better shooter than in 04-05 (his rookie year) or last season.
It’s a bit of a leap to faith to think Duhon will take a step forward and become a quality starting PG, but he’s as solid a back-up PG as you’ll find… 10-12 mpg??? Maybe playing behind Chris Paul.
It’s nice to see the other side of the story, but this analysis is as emotionally charged as if I, as a Knicks fan, were to say Duhon will become the next Steve Nash.

“Who will I incessantly rip on now?

Blogabull_s_tiny by your friendly BullsBlogger on Jul 6, 2008 7:56 PM

Chris Duhon is no longer a Chicago Bull.

The writing’s been on the wall for months, but it’s still odd to realize he won’t be back. I’be been trying to restrain any premature celebrating of his departure, because I still thought he’d find a way to worm his way back on the roster. But even if the Bulls originally thought they’d put up a fight, they were certainly scared away by a nearly-MLE offer from the Knicks. (Apparently they’ve really clamped down on the wasteful spending: “We’ll overpay you, but for only two years, buddy!”)

Back to Chris Duhon sucking as a Bull and how much I hated it. A lot of it wasn’t really his fault. He was the apple of Scott Skiles’ eye, the type who’d give it his darndest even when overmatched, which was pretty much always. Skiles even used him to guard LeBron James on more than a-plenty of occasions.

But is it Duhon’s fault that he was so often over-used and mis-used? Not really. As purely a backup PG who’d get only 10-12 minutes a night, he’d be fine. He doesn’t turn the ball over, can hassle opposing PGs effectively, and he’ll give you one game a year where he hits a half-dozen three-pointers. Maybe given limited minutes and strict instructions when to shoot (especially instructions to shoot when open…man how I detested that), he’d be especially effective.

But this contract is the second multi-yeared-and-millioned deal he’s received in his career, and it’s the essence of what is wrong with having Chris Duhon on your team: someone, likely in a decision-making position, will look at his skillset and ‘intangibles’ (though that strangely clashed with his off-court habits) and think that since he’s an ‘unselfish’ and ‘smart’ player, that more minutes is a good thing.

It’s not.

Duhon gets praised as a ‘pass-first’ point guard. But he’s not ‘pass first’. He’s ‘ass first’. His most preferred style of play is to play like ass. Then pass, then shoot. Oftentimes never getting to that third one, crippling your offensive flow, and ticking me off.

But no longer…and it’s almost sad. (Wait, I forgot for a second that the Bulls just used the #1 overall selection to take a point guard.) So long, Duh! Despite your absence, consider this space, and apparently at least one Chicago bar (yes, those are my dainty hands in the photo), places where your legacy will remain intact.

P.s.: Duhon sucks.”

Let’s see…. Team A wins 33 games with Player X as starting point guard. The following year, with Player X missing 58 games, Team A wins just 23. Which is more likely to cause a 10-game improvement the next year?
a) Player A makes a comeback
b) Player B is cut and misses all 82 games
hmmmmm….
How about people nominate examples of “addition by subtraction.” If anyone is interested, I’ll write a post to break them down – maybe I can be convinced. You can take this as an offer or a threat :)

Hmmmm I wonder how the 01/02 Nets 04/05 Suns would affect such a calculation. :-)

I agree with Caleb on this one, nice to say that after our differences over Lee…

The Nets traded him for Jason Kidd, one of the best pure point guards in history (meaning, Steph had trade value then and probably still has some under present contract conditions if he plays well). They did not hand the reins to Chris Duhon.

The Suns traded him mainly to create cap room (they made the playoffs the season before and they took the Spurs (eventual NBA champs) to 6 games so he wasn’t exactly a bum there and I have not uncovered any personality issues with teammates from phoenix. They absolutely stunk for the rest of that season, then picked up Steve Nash (what was Cuban thinking?!) and the rest is history.

I think what we all have in common is an initial trust for Walsh and D’Antoni. I can live with whatever decision they make. It is fun to take a position in advance of that, but since both guys seem shrewd and unlikely to make a decision based on superficialities, I can feel good that if they decide to cut bait, they felt strongly about Steph’s postential to disrupt their plans. I hope that the guys on the other side of this argument will feel the same way if they decide to let him hang around to see if they can salvage something out of the situation.

http://www.nba.com/magic/news/sl_scores.html

Beasley lived up to expectations: 28 pts, 9 boards, 2 assists and 1 blk (in only 22 minutes).

Rose . . . not so much: 10 pts, 4 assists, 5 turnovers.

Wait for it…

THE OKLAHOMA CITY THUNDERCATS

(no joke)

Who’s their mascot? Snarf?

Thundercats, Ho!