Wow...different opinion on Rose...

[houheffna]

This guy is an idiot. The whole point is that he is mad that Rose has the physical gifts that Westbrook and Ellis don't that allow him to take his game to the next level in that style of play and not Wade's. He is not Wade, never has been, and would have a much shorter career if he played that way. Let him do his thing; it seems to be working.

He has been catching hell on twitter all night for what he said. Especially after the game Rose had...

 

[Glide2keva]

He has been catching hell on twitter all night for what he said. Especially after the game Rose had...

As he should.

 

[houheffna]

As he should.

He says that he felt the same way about Wade though...it took him a while to find anything to like about Wade's game. That is who he compares Rose to. Not enough variance to him in Rose's game, his words not mines...

 

[X]

fwiw, I read this article for the first time just now...and the writer is coming off as a guy who just finished a psych 101 class and wanted to use his big words to go way against the flow in order to get his article read/name heard. congrats, I read it...But if you fear Rose isn't the player you want him to become, what is it you want him to be? He's never going to be a 20-15-8 player...he's more like a 30-8-5 player. Either stat-line is damn impressive, and I'm personally glad he's on my team...and yeah, I'll say it, there's not one PG currently playing in the NBA that I'd rather have on my team.

 

[WearShades]

It's annoying how so many of the users on this site are unwilling or unable to read into anything beyond the surface. Subtlety is lost on so many of you.

The point of the article is that the author cannot enjoy watching Rose because he doesn't see a point guard, he sees an extremely athletic player who ignores the artistry and many of the nuances of the game because his physical abilities allow him to do so. To him, watching Rose as compared to other point guards is like watching a 9th grade kid balling over a bunch of elementary school students. He destroys his competition, but not because he games them into defeat, but rather because he just has greater physical tools.

I personally don't agree with the author's opinion at all, but I totally understand what he's saying. Some of you need to put a little more effort into what you read.

 

[houheffna]

It's annoying how so many of the users on this site are unwilling or unable to read into anything beyond the surface. Subtlety is lost on so many of you.

The point of the article is that the author cannot enjoy watching Rose because he doesn't see a point guard, he sees an extremely athletic player who ignores the artistry and many of the nuances of the game because his physical abilities allow him to do so. To him, watching Rose as compared to other point guards is like watching a 9th grade kid balling over a bunch of elementary school students. He destroys his competition, but not because he games them into defeat, but rather because he just has greater physical tools.

I personally don't agree with the author's opinion at all, but I totally understand what he's saying. Some of you need to put a little more effort into what you read.

I couldn't have said it any better myself. Though I was part of the problem too. Dismissing a guy for not liking Rose's game is simplistic, especially after he does, what I think, is an admirable job of explaining himself...I didn't post the column to necessarily ridicule the author.

I posted the column to have a cognitive conversation about what is a rare athlete. I too disagreed with the writer. I appreciate everyone's feedback, but one idiot kind of set the tone for the whole thread. I figured the column would go over his head...and it did. So he assaulted the column, the writer, everything and everybody he could because the column didn't feed his meatball mentality. Poor fella...good luck to him...

I do appreciate everyone's feedback, but I agree with WearShades. Columns like this pop up daily. I have posted stuff from Rosen, Pruiti, other writers/bloggers who have more to say than "Jordan is better than Kobe", but can actually tell you why...BECAUSE THEY KNOW THE GAME! I want to learn more and more about basketball, the nuances of the game. I am unapologetic about that....

 

[Fredsmooth21]

The guys who don't like Rose's game because he's a scoring PG are probably the same guys who hated watching players like McNabb and Vick play the QB position. They don't fit the mold of what history tells you a QB should be, just like Rose doesn't with being a PG.

I personally never cared what kind of game a player has or what mold he fits as long as he wins. The league is changing though. Look at the PGs playing on a lot of teams. They are all athletic guys who can score. The fact that Rondo is still debated by some idiots being as good as rose is because he fits more with what traditionalists think a PG should be. At this point I'll take Rose over any other PG in the game. Some people may not agree with that, but who cares in the end? I think we can all agree that as long as the bulls keep winning because of Rose, who cares what his game is like.

 

[Steveo16220]

That article was dreadful and not b/c he was attempting to find flaws in D-Rose, but, I don't think the he even knew what point he was trying to get across. From Big Ben, to missle silo's, gang signs and back to psychoanalysis? Really, man?

Will not even attempt to discuss what the point he was trying to get across about Rose's game. It just makes no sense.

 

[Glide2keva]

Well, anything critical of Rose's game is gold to some posters on here.

 

[houheffna]

Well, anything critical of Rose's game is gold to some posters on here.

I know of nobody on this forum who criticizes Rose's game...that is a needless cheapshot...

 

[pinkizdead]

It's annoying how so many of the users on this site are unwilling or unable to read into anything beyond the surface. Subtlety is lost on so many of you.

The point of the article is that the author cannot enjoy watching Rose because he doesn't see a point guard, he sees an extremely athletic player who ignores the artistry and many of the nuances of the game because his physical abilities allow him to do so. To him, watching Rose as compared to other point guards is like watching a 9th grade kid balling over a bunch of elementary school students. He destroys his competition, but not because he games them into defeat, but rather because he just has greater physical tools.

I personally don't agree with the author's opinion at all, but I totally understand what he's saying. Some of you need to put a little more effort into what you read.

i read law cases all day long. I get home at around 8 or 9, and i'm pretty tired. I just want to watch some tv, read espn.com, and go to sleep. When i read a sports article, i dont expect it to be as difficult as 'beyond good and evil'. He's a bad writer, because his arguments are all over the place. May be i'm being babied by the legal profession, but i dont think it's too much to ask for 'clear and concise' arguments.

Also i can believe any of you take this argument seriously. I said he had one valid criticism of rose. He doesn't draw contact. Not playing like a traditional point is not a criticism of rose. In fact, rose didn't want to play this way. We made him! The coaches wanted rose to take more shots. The fans wanted rose to be more aggressive. Really, how can we criticize rose for playing this way? Derrick rose is a rare freak athlete, how can you criticize him for playing like a rare freak athlete. His value is because he's a freak athlete.

 

[Glide2keva]

This

 

[WearShades]

i read law cases all day long. I get home at around 8 or 9, and i'm pretty tired. I just want to watch some tv, read espn.com, and go to sleep. When i read a sports article, i dont expect it to be as difficult as 'beyond good and evil'. He's a bad writer, because his arguments are all over the place. May be i'm being babied by the legal profession, but i dont think it's too much to ask for 'clear and concise' arguments.

Also i can believe any of you take this argument seriously. I said he had one valid criticism of rose. He doesn't draw contact. Not playing like a traditional point is not a criticism of rose. In fact, rose didn't want to play this way. We made him! The coaches wanted rose to take more shots. The fans wanted rose to be more aggressive. Really, how can we criticize rose for playing this way? Derrick rose is a rare freak athlete, how can you criticize him for playing like a rare freak athlete. His value is because he's a freak athlete.

It's really not that difficult to understand what he's saying, though I do understand that after a day of reading law briefs one's mind is just not geared towards that kind of writing.

He's not criticizing Rose's ability to play a winning brand of basketball, he's stating why he doesn't enjoy watching Rose play. Those are two different things. I hope that helps.

 

[pinkizdead]

'That's tantamount to saying the spurs are boring. I'd rather watch the heat.' Opinions of that sort aren't debatable nor relevant, well, to anything. Who cares what he likes?

 

[WearShades]

'That's tantamount to saying the spurs are boring. I'd rather watch the heat.' Opinions of that sort aren't debatable nor relevant, well, to anything. Who cares what he likes?

You don't have to care. His opinion just differs from most and that's part of why we're discussing it here.

 

[pinkizdead]

My point is that your description of what this article is,' what kind of basketball a guy enjoys watching regardless of wins' doesn't leave much to discuss. What's there to discuss? It's a matter of preference. Kudos for this guy to having a visceral reaction to watching rose play basketball.

 

[houheffna]

You don't have to care. His opinion just differs from most and that's part of why we're discussing it here.

That's why people write columns to tell you what they think!!! What is so hard about that? It's not a news report...its a column.....

 

[X]

It's annoying how so many of the users on this site are unwilling or unable to read into anything beyond the surface. Subtlety is lost on so many of you.

The point of the article is that the author cannot enjoy watching Rose because he doesn't see a point guard, he sees an extremely athletic player who ignores the artistry and many of the nuances of the game because his physical abilities allow him to do so. To him, watching Rose as compared to other point guards is like watching a 9th grade kid balling over a bunch of elementary school students. He destroys his competition, but not because he games them into defeat, but rather because he just has greater physical tools.

I personally don't agree with the author's opinion at all, but I totally understand what he's saying. Some of you need to put a little more effort into what you read.

No...i got it, and he still comes across as silly. He would rather have a guy who passes more than shoots, because that's what point guards are supposed to do, even tho that's exactly not what this team needs. He would, apparently, rather see the bulls go to another 41-41 season and 1st round playoff exit than succeed...as long as Rose looks more like Paul, or Rondo...but his fear is he'll never play like them, b/c he's just too damn athletic. What a bastard.

 

[jbrown60180]

I really dislike the guy as a writer, its almost impossible to read his stuff over at freedarko. He was even scraped as the Heat special writer on deadspin after 20 games because he would get hammered after each article.
I don't agree with his opinion on Rose's game but I can understand where he was coming from. For the longest time I argued with my friends about me hating Lebron's game. Ive always preferred Kobe's more graceful style compared to Lebron's power game.
Numbers in sports can be argued to a certain point, but people can argue styles all day long. Payton, Smith, and Sanders all put up similar numbers but all three did it in a different style. People could argue all day over who is the best RB of time and could could make a good point for all three. It all depends what one person finds pleasing to the eyes just like a guys taste in women. Ive heard some people say Gisele isn't hot and I think that is absurd just like saying Rose isn't pleasing to watch play ball. But hey thats someone's opinion and they are entitled to it.