I'm struggling to see what the difference is in the two situations, besides the fact that McGrady was cooperative enough to try to play when the team asked him to.
Derrick Rose's game is predicated on explosiveness. If he can't give that yet, he shouldn't play. Besides, his owner's probably not allowing it. Rose is the future of that franchise. I commend Joakim Noah's playing through pain and such, but if Rose re-aggravates that injury, whence Da Bulls?
It's a simple question. I think we all know, in this case, it's on Rose. Once the team leaves it up to the player, they are placing all the responsibility on him, so he'll get the blame if something goes wrong. It seems like people forget players don't just step in from summer vacation and play at 100%. There's more to it than just being cleared for full contact. Comparing him to Shumpert and Noah is ridiculous. One is a big and the other a role player. Neither has/had to prepare to be Derrick Rose.
To be fair, nobody aside from the media or fans has asked or pleaded for him to play. Can't see that being the same thing.
The problem with this whole Rose situation isn't the fact that he's not playing, but its the fact that he is giving Bulls fans false hope / optimism that he may still return this season instead of just admitting he is taking the year off.
