Monday, April 18, 2011

2011 NBA Playoffs: A Thorough Response to the Chicago Bulls Toughest Critics

The voting is over but the results aren't in yet. It appears that Derrick Rose will soon be named the league's MVP for 2010-2011. He said at the beginning of the year that he didn't see why he couldn't be. Some will still point at some metrics, but enough agree now that he probably did. 

The Bulls turned out to be a lot better than everyone thought they were. Their 62-20 record was the best in the NBA.

Yet for some reason there still remains with a large percentage of people that the Heat, not the Bulls, are the favorite to get out of the East. 

People have given a lot of reasons for dismissing the Bulls. I was wondering if those reasons were valid. Some of them are right, some of them are wrong, some of them are misleading and with some of them, it's just impossible to say whether it's accurate because there's just not enough data to make the determination. 

I hope you can take the time to read this opening slide because it's something of a disclaimer. 

I understand that not everyone is a Bulls fan. I am a Featured Columnist for the Bulls and a large part of the reason for that is that I am a Bulls fan. However neither being a Bulls fan nor not being a Bulls fan are a sound basis for an opinion on  the Bulls. 

Opinions should be formed on objective facts or data. The data I've looked at is objective. It's not a fan of the Bulls or the Heat or any other team.

I haven't gone through this data in two or three minutes, I've been researching it for about four days.

I also understand that stats only say so much. Your eyes tell part of the story, too. I've only missed one Bulls game this season, so I've watched a large enough sample size of the Bulls to know what the "eyes" say as well as what the data says. 

I point this out merely to say that these arguments are not slapped together haphazardly. I've tried to be thorough, do my due diligence in researching everything, and in part, this is out of respect to you—the reader. I just hope you pay the same respect if you respond by addressing not just the topic, but the arguments themselves in your comments. 

I've tried to critique my own arguments the same as reasonable reader might, or I might were it someone else's article. I have at least attempted to make theories of certain things "falsifiable" to use a scientific term. I've looked at the data to see whether my own arguments are valid too. In short, I've at least tried to be intellectually honest. 

I also want to point out that this is to address whether the Bulls have a chance. It's not to compare them with other individual teams or to say that the Bulls are the "only" team that has a chance.

It is merely looking at specific criticisms and whether those prohibit the Bulls from being a legitimate contender. No one should take my saying the Bulls are a contender as an indication that another team is not.  

Begin Slideshow

Susie Castillo Fergie Ivanka Trump Blake Lively Christina Applegate

No comments:

Post a Comment