Thanks for the data, shoryuken. I’m aware statistics provide only a snapshot and are a useful analytical tool since perceptions don’t always match reality, as we all let our personal biases factor in to what our eyes are telling us.

These stats reflect the final 18 games, a period I chose because TT started his horrific shooting slump at that time, yet he didn’t seem to be hurting the team any worse than all the others while on the court. The Bulls were still “fighting” for a playoff berth and buffoon Boylan was determined to play his veterans instead of giving developmental minutes to his younger players. If not for injuries, this trend would likely have continued until the final whistle of his final game, but as they faded (6 and 12) along with any hope of the playoffs in sight, even his thick skull told him it was time to abandon all hope and play those rebellious rascals who cost him his job.

Here for what they are worth, or not, are the plus/minus numbers for that stretch. It shows playing the veterans didn’t help and playing the less experienced guys didn’t hurt. Giving Duhon all that time at the end either means the Bulls plan to keep him or are showcasing him to whoever needs a relatively solid backup point guard who can deliver spectacularly every 20th game.

For those who think this is a worthless stat please skip them so you can rationalize your positions more effectively. If what happens when a player is on the court is meaningless, than why get upset about substitutions, rotations and adjustments? I think that over a period of time they do tell a story. Obviously only a chapter, but meaningful nevertheless. And might I add, they make a stronger case to play more TT and Noah, which feeds into my personal biases.

Final 18 games - Season (/ – )
Player Minutes (/ – )

Gray 185:50 +32 -25

Duhon 186:43 +20

Thomas 355:42 +10

Brown 6:03 -2

Nichols 19:12 -12

Simmons 9:33 -18

Nocioni 305:07 -32

Gooden 309:31 -34

Thabo 414:03 -38

Kirk 485:42 -45

Deng 590:64 -45

Noah 501:01 -48

Hughes 495.52 -57

Gordon 469:02 -66

but I haven’t figured out how to format yet and posted them by accident before I finished. While you say the last 18 games plus-minuses are worthless, I never claimed they should be used as the gold standard. You apparently disagreed with my point that they demonstrated the new assets and veteran players failed to come through when it mattered the most and the Bulls wound up in the lottery. Lets just agree to disagree. One man’s nonsense could be another man’s road to discovery.
So how do you feel about these?
The next stat tool takes into account the entire season and shows how the team performed when each individual player was on the court. This is a very valuable piece of data in my estimation, although it obviously does not account for player combinations. Used by intelligent coaches, it may provide them in coming up with more effective groupings next year, like Thabo, TT and Noah running the floor against teams without monster front lines. The individual Net result per game is derived as follows: Assume while Kirk is on the court the Bulls are plus 2, but when he is riding the bench the team goes -7. His net contribution in that game would be plus 9, indicating while he was out, at least for that game, it hurt them. So who do these stats say had the best value per game over the season? See below. Yes I know, IT’S just another TOOL, NOT A PAPAL ENCYCLICAL.
Entire Season Stats
Player Net Value per gm & (+/– )

Noah +3.4 -25

Thomas +2.8 -34

Gray +1.5 -25

Duhon +1.5 -66

Nocioni +0.5 -119

Kirk +0.3 -146

Thabo -0.4 -100

Deng -1.0 -157

Hughes -1.4 -70

Gooden -3.5 -71

Gordon -4.3 -232

Gardner -6.7 -9

Nichols -14.3 -11

Simmons -24.5 -11

Brown -34.6 -17
What these numbers seem to show is that the 2 most effective Bulls players last year while on the floor were Noah and Tyrus. This doesn’t come as any surprise to most BlogaBullers, but as I previously noted, Boylan was “not a stats guy”, but he was an A #1 incompetent idiot who could not think on his feet, or on his ass for that matter.
It also indicates that Gooden sucked it up while playing with the great LBJ and that maybe Hughes is not as bad as our own Ben Gordon who was by far the biggest negative performer of any regular last year, again no surprise to those of us who had trouble stomaching his defensive shortcomings. Is it also possible that some of our bloggers biggest whipping boys were not the primary culprits in the Bulls demise, like Kirk and Noce? Thabo should improve and I expect almost quantam leaps with TT and Noah under the proper guidance and motivation by our hopefully excellent, knowledgeable new staff. Aaron is always portrayed as a hopeless stiff. To me, he can be an adequate back up and an overall positive considering he was a 54th pick. This team could be a winner if we could only somewhow get Chris Paul or Derrin Williams for Hughes and Nichols.

I agree that stats don’t tell the whole story about a players impact on a game (especialy like a Shane Battier), but they are excellent at showing trends.

1) The sample size – The whole season isn’t big enough? There’s 21 games against good teams, 23 against average, and 19 against poor. That’s plenty sample.
2) Previous season stats are irrevelant. Last 2 years, the everyone on the Bulls had nice stats cause as a team the Bulls were doing well. Deng had no problem against facing good competition when everyone else was doing well. This year, the crap hit the fan. When things aren’t going well, you expect your big time player who want a big time contract to step up and make the big plays in the big time games.
3) Injuries – Everyone has injuries during the course of the season. I do think Deng suffered the worst injuries of any Bull. However, he was able to still pour it on against cruddy teams without problems. After Deng’s November injury, his first 3 backs games were against Toronto, Atlanta, and Charlotte. After his early December injury, his next 3 games were aainst Atlanta, Orlando, and Miami. His first 3 games back after the big Dec/Jan Injury were NJ, Denver, and Houston. So in the 9 games following extended injuries, he played only 3 games against against “good” teams (Orlando, Denver, and Houston). That’s why I don’t like the injury excuse
4. Minutes/Rotations – Unlike the Bulls guards, Deng was guaranteed at least 30 minutes at either forward position. Teams also don’t regularly double team Deng, so I don’t buy any “extra defensive pressure” arguement.

Remember these stats are the averages over a whole season, so one or two bad games shouldn’t effect the overall result. Deng’s peers (like Danny Granger, Rudy Gay, Corey Maggette) all played on bad teams but were able to maintain their game against good competition. I like Deng a lot, but his alarming drop off against good teams indicates that he is not necessarily a big time player who deserves a big time contract.