Chicago Bulls: Why the Bulls' Losing Skid Will Continue Against Warriors
After the loss, Tom Thibodeau took full responsibility for the team’s poor showing, stating it is on him to do a better job with getting the players ready and that he will push them harder going forward (via Yahoo!).
While I have no doubt that he will drive the point home with his players, here are a couple of reasons why the Bulls will come up short against the Warriors.
For starters, the Bulls have had a difficult time putting the ball in the basket as of late. They connected on just 38 percent of their shots against the Kings, marking the team’s fourth consecutive outing in which they have failed to shoot 40 percent from the field.
Chicago has also dropped 12 of its last 19 games overall, including six of the last 10.
Additionally, the Bulls are averaging just 81 points per game away from home during their current five-game road slide.
Unless they can find a way to generate a lot of easy scores on the offensive end, this game will get away from them early.
Can the Bulls top the Warriors?
Chicago did beat Golden State 103-87 when the teams faced off at the United Center back in January. Kirk Hinrich led the way with 25 points, including 6-of-7 from beyond the arc.
However, this game will be on the Warriors’ home court, and history shows the Bulls don’t play too well in the Bay Area.
In fact, Chicago has come away empty-handed in 11 of its previous 13 road games against Golden State, and the last three losses were by double-digit margins.
On the flip side of the coin, the Warriors are averaging over 100 points per game on the season and have won 10 of their previous 13 home games.
As is the case with most of their games this season, the Bulls defense will make things interesting for a while.
In the final analysis, though, the Warriors will continue their dominance over a fatigued and depleted Bulls team that is searching for answers.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?