Toward the end of the first quarter, I lost all interest in the All-Star Game and just quit watching. Derrick Rose had 11 points on 5-for-13 shooting and five assists in almost 30 minutes of play. You can judge that for what you will. (Box Score)
Rose isn't really into this type of game, for reasons undeclared on the record, but Sam Smith's handjob is a bit over the top:
Part of the issue is he can be too good a teammate. We see that with
the Bulls at times as he's prone to start games slowly, unlike the Spurs
game before the All-Star break last week when Rose exploded into the
game and scored his career high 42 points.
Rose mostly looks to get teammates going, play the traditional point
guard role, and then the Bulls fall behind. So he pushes hard in the
second half and the Bulls win.
Who the hell says this to explain why a guy scores 11 on 13 shots in 30 minutes?
I like you, Sam. I like you a lot. You're a solid reporter, a smart
basketball man, and something of an institution in my basketball world,
but really? "Too good a teammate" to have an impressive All-Star Game?
Readers get what you're saying there, but this hyperbole was meant to be
Also, didn't the East fall behind in the first half? Way behind?
My point is that if Rose dropped 25 points and 12 dimes, Smith (and a ton of other bloggers and marquee columnists) would write something along the lines of, 'I mean, seriously, how is he not MVP?!? Look at what he did against the best in the game!!!'
That Rose said he got to rest on offense was good. This is what most players are supposed to do on offense, but the Bulls don't run plays for him to get that rest, as Rose notes in Smith's post.
It was one game that was apparently largely unimpressive. An exhibition game at that. It doesn't need apologies, just as it wouldn't need praise if he was amazing past the base-level entertainment value.