After last year's Eastern Conference Finals loss to Miami, every Chicago Bulls fan I know pinned their hopes for the 2011-12 season on a single article.
After winning the NBA MVP in his second season, Derrick Rose wasn't celebrating; instead he locked himself in his house, ordered pizza, brooded and began divining ways to win a championship. This time, nothing was going to stop him.
55 games later, things look a little different for Rose. He's missed Chicago's last 11 games and, with the playoffs less than a month away, hasn't played a minute since March 12. Despite his absence, the team has played well, winning 14 of 21 and continuing to lead the NBA in wins.
Somewhere between that 14-7 record and Bill Simmons' Ewing Theory, I couldn't stop wondering: Could the Bulls win the 2011-12 NBA championship without their MVP?
Every pundit on Earth seems to believe the Bulls are the favorite or extremely close to Miami and Oklahoma City, and with good reason. The Bulls have the best winning percentage, .764, in the NBA; they're perched neck-and-neck with Miami atop John Hollinger's NBA Power Rankings; and Chicago projects to finish with a better 82-game record (67-15) than last year's 62-20 squad.
Given that they've accomplished all that with Rose missing 40 percent of their games, I would submit that not only are the Bulls the favorite, it's by a pretty wide margin.
So how much of that margin could they lose?
With Rose, the Bulls are 28-6 (.823), about 12 full-season wins better than their .666 percentage without him. Rose's injuries haven't been the only thing plaguing the team, however: Joakim Noah got off to a slow start after the lockout, and Luol Deng (46 games played) and Rip Hamilton (17) have been hurt as well.
Given the randomness of the NBA playoffs, is it that bizarre to think a 54-win (.666) team could win it all? Last year's champion (Dallas, .695) won 57, the same as the Lakers team that preceded them. Those Lakers went to seven games in the Finals against a 50-win Celtics team.
The better question may be what a Chicago title without Rose would mean to the star's future. While I still contend that, as Hollinger says, The Derrick Rose Story didn't deserve to win MVP last year, #1 is undisputedly Chicago's leader. He's sixth in the NBA in Player Efficiency Rating after finishing ninth last season and just signed a five-year, $95 million extension. He's not going anywhere.
Still, Rose took last year's loss to Miami hard. Wouldn't he take it even harder if Chicago - his hometown squad, a fact he seems to enjoy more than any other star in pro sports - completed its mission without him? What if Carlos Boozer won Finals MVP and Rose had to watch in a suit as #5 accepted the trophy that would look so good next to Rose's regular season award?
From what we know about Rose, he'd probably deflect any questions about his future with humility and grace while giving his teammates and coaching staff all the credit. He'd talk about coming back better than ever the next year to help the team start another three-peat.
When Rose stepped away, with only his friends and the next season to comfort him, the story might be different.
Delivery drivers, start your engines.
No comments:
Post a Comment