Blog a Bull: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Sports blogs for fans, by fans.
Around SBN: Fedor vs Rogers Results and Live Coverage

This Bulls Team Next Year Pt 2

The final chart of the previous post estimated that the 8-man rotation coming back next year (Rose - Salmons - Deng - Tyrus - Noah - Hinrich - Timmy - Miller) would play +4.13 points better per 100 possessions than league average, assuming they 1) accounted for 90% of the team minutes next year and 2) played the exact same next year as they did this year with the Bulls.

Whew, run-on!  But those assumptions leave out a big factor: the likely improvements of Rose, Deng, Tyrus, Noah and regressions of Miller, Salmons, Hinrich, and Tim Thomas.

Below is my projection for each player next season.  I won't get too deeply into why I chose the numbers I did, except that Noah's play after January 25th this year indicates a huge season is ahead, and after a big study on Rose, I think he should be on a faster track to success than his comparable talents.  Hinrich regresses slightly after an above-average shooting year, and Salmons' numbers with the Bulls (especially TS%, AST%, and TOV%) were way out of whack from his Sacramento numbers.

You can compare the following chart to the numbers from this season.

2008-2009 % of min TS% OREB% AST% TOV% USG% EOPM Net Effect EDPM Net Effect
Rose 0.75 0.53 3.5 32 13 25 3.51 2.63 -2.00 -1.50
Tyrus 0.60 0.53 7.8 9 13.6 20 -1.03 -0.62 3.50 2.10
Noah 0.65 0.6 14.5 11 14 14 1.37 0.89 3.50 2.28
Deng 0.65 0.54 6 11 10 22 0.80 0.52 0.50 0.33
Hinrich 0.50 0.53 1.4 22.7 15 19 0.09 0.05 0.00 0.00
Salmons 0.70 0.55 1.9 14 14 22 -0.12 -0.08 -1.00 -0.70
Miller 0.45 0.55 8 18 16 17 0.10 0.04 0.50 0.23
Timmy 0.20 0.53 3.5 10 12 18 -1.17 -0.23 -2.00 -0.40
% of min: 0.90 Exp O: 3.21 Exp D: 2.33
Actual O ? Actual D ?
Exp Net: 5.53

Again, this is just my projection, but if this is anywhere near accurate, we can expect our overall talent level to boost slightly next season, from +4.13 to +5.53.  Assuming the final 10% of minutes (our deep bench) plays at -2, we're a +4.5 team, making us slightly better than the Houston Rockets this season, and projecting us at a 53-29 record.  You can expect next year's Bulls to have the best record since Jordan left.

That's awesome YaoPau, but where do we go from here?

53-29 would give us the #4 seed in the East and a likely second round exit vs. the Cavs.  And then Brad Miller's contract is up.  Salmons' expires the year after, and Hinrich the year after that.  So as good as next year's team should be, it doesn't really get us anywhere.

The core of this team though - Rose, Deng, Tyrus, Noah - could be here for the next decade.  That's four of the league's top players 24 years old or younger, and we've got 'em!  Contrary to some opinions on this board, I don't see Deng or Tyrus getting much better from here, maybe a +2.5/+3 at their max, mainly because I haven't seen them improve much over the last two years.  Rose and Noah can both be +5 players, possibly higher.  Regardless of whether those vague projections come true, I think we can safely assume those four will combine for at least +8 while averaging 30+ mpg between them within a few years.  Meaning if we can start assembling a group of +0, +1, +2, even -1 players around them, we'll be a Rockets-esque, Pistons-esque contender for awhile.  Basically, add Miller/Hinrich/Salmons type players who will be around when our young talent develops.

Our two main needs are 1) a SG who can defend bigger guards, knock down the 3, and pass well, and 2) a PF who can defend 1-on-1 in the post and rebound defensively.  Obviously if we can land a Wade (about a +12 APM) or Bosh (about a +6 APM), that's huge, but realistically we should have another plan. 

Here's a list of unheralded players who fill needs with neutral or positive minutes:

1) DaJuan Blair - Boston exploited our defensive rebounding weaknesses, and Blair should be an improvement over Tyrus and Noah in that department right away.  He should also be the defensive 1-on-1 stopper in the post that Tyrus is not.  (I projected Blair at +3 to +5 defensively after studying undersized big men.)  And he can score a bit too.  He's my first choice at the #15 pick, and I'd even consider trading up to get him.

2) Terrence Williams - A 6'6" SG stud defender who can guard 3 positions.  But what makes him special are his 5.0 assists per game as a senior.  His crappy TS% indicates he'll barely score in the NBA, but he worked on his 3pt shooting enough (from 26.1% as a sophomore to 38.5% as a senior) that I think he can become a better passing Raja Bell for us, and somebody who'd fit nicely alongside Rose.  If Blair's gone, he's my pick.

3) Rashad McCants - Restricted Free Agent.  He's an undersized SG (6'3.75" in shoes) who had a terrible year in 2009.  But he was so good as a 23 year old in 2008 (+3.43 offensive APM, +1.56 defensive APM, 40.7 3PT%) that I think he can be a huge payoff for little risk.

4) Luther Head - Unrestricted Free Agent.  The second option if we can't get McCants, Head barely played this season but put up a +0.23 APM season in 2008 (+0.60 defensive).  Combine that with a career 39.2 3PT% and 18.1 AST% this year, and he's a good fit at backup SG that we can get for next to nothing.

5) Shelden Williams - Restricted Free Agent.  The #5 pick a few years back, he's barely seen the floor despite putting up solid numbers.  He posted a +0.87 APM in 2008 (+2.74 defensive) and his career 23.3 DREB% would've led our team this year.  If we don't land Blair, acquiring Shelden (giving up our second 1st?) makes sense to me.

6) Sean May - Restricted Free Agent.  He had microfracture surgery two years ago and has barely played since.  But he put up a +1.50 EOPM, 23.3 DREB% and a 14.5 AST% in 2007, albeit with mediocre defense.  Charlotte may be willing to trade him for cheap, and he's another low-risk worth taking.

In the 2010 offseason, there are some other, cheaper free agents that fit, including Joe Johnson, Darius Songaila, Chuck Hayes, and Carl Landry.

Analyzing the Plan

Let's say we get DaJuan Blair, Rashad McCants, and Luther Head ... unload Hinrich for cap space ... and re-sign Tyrus to an extension for $10 mil per.  That would put our payroll in the 2010 offseason at around $42 million, meaning we'd have the money to bring in a Wade, Bosh, or Joe Johnson. 

But even if we don't land one of the big fish, we'd still be a 55 win team with the cap room to get a quality secondary free agent or trade for a bigger name in a salary dump situation.  That's what I love about this plan: it relies on talent we already have, and sets us up for immediate and long-term success without compromising future acquisitions.

FanPosts are user-created posts from the BlogABull community, and are to be treated as the opinions and views of that particular user, not that of the blogger or blog community as a whole.

9 recs  |  Comment 63 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Tyrus hasn’t earned an extension for 10 mil…..6 mill, I’m cool with, but he needs to post at least a 16 pt, 10 reb season before he should even sniff 10 mill/year.

Landry would be a great backup PF.

I like T.Williams as a backup SG/SF who can defend and pass and score 10/12 a game which is all we really need.

by C Smoove on May 20, 2009 3:54 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Points and rebounds = the totality of basketball.

Right.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 20, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Zach Randolph is the best PF in the history of the game!

Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.

by Prevenge on May 21, 2009 12:25 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Where on Earth do you get that DeJuan Blair projects to be a defensive 1-on-1 stopper?

I’ve not read one report to that effect and any comparable I can think of (Boozer, Millsap, Maxiell, even Brand) are hardly that. Your link compares APM which has nothing to do with 1-on-1 abilities.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 20, 2009 5:44 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

He's actually pretty solid as a help defender, but not because of Tyrus like leaping ability (obviously)

but instead because he has extremely long arms and very quick hands for his size. He racks up steals at a crazy high rate for a big man.

"Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy." --Newton

by fundamentallysound on May 20, 2009 7:50 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I should note that my response was meant as an agreeing with tyger, because upon reading it

that was less clear than I intended. Blair probably won’t be a one on one post defender in the mold of say Chuck Hayes, but he’ll grab steals and get loads of rebounds. Those help reduce opponents’ possessions, too. He can be an effective defender, but he’s not going to be locking anyone down one on one from what I’ve seen.

"Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy." --Newton

by fundamentallysound on May 20, 2009 7:53 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

right

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 21, 2009 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Most undersized PFs that are great defenders will be great 1-on-1 defenders

You name Boozer, Millsap, Maxiell, Brand – four guys who aren’t known as great defenders. In my link I named undersized PFs that are: Hayes, Najera, Landry, Evans, Shelden Williams. None of those guys block shots, they excel defensively because they’re great 1-on-1.

by YaoPau on May 21, 2009 12:14 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

right, 4 not good, 5 good

Hardly anything to draw a conclusion from. And I’ve never heard Williams, Najera or Evans being accused of “excelling” at 1-on-1 defense. Help defenders? Yes. But not 1-on-1.

If you have something that shows that they do excel at defending 1-on-1 (and not just defense overall), I’d love to see it.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 21, 2009 9:40 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Wait. Where did you get the conclusion to your subject?

And to your… conclusion? I’ve never heard of Evans (and I’ve followed him being an Iowa fan), Najera or even Williams excelling at 1-on-1 defending.

This is what bothers me about your statistical analysis. You do a lot of good work, both creatively and banging out the statistical grunt work, but then you make huge assumptions that undermine a lot of credibility (in my mind) of what you study.

Your undersized big-man study you linked to is a perfect example. You found a strong correlation between steals and defensive adjusted plus-minus. Great. That makes sense. You throw in a few minor assumptions as well to explain it, which you sometimes need to do until you get further study: they use their strong body and quick hands and they get rebounds, etc. But then, here, you say simply, “Most undersized PFs that are great defenders will be great 1-on-1 defenders,” w/ zero proof, zero evidence and even zero logical jumps. You just state it. As fact. The only thing that is even close to helping you draw this conclusion is that you saw Chuck Hayes defend Carlos Boozer (someone undersized as well, no less, making Hayes’s height less of an issue). But I’d agree that Hayes is a very good 1-on-1 defender. But that doesn’t mean that everyone else is.

At most, from the data you provided, you can say that steals-per-40 in college strongly correlate (of course, you didn’t give an r-squared or anything) to dAPM (which doesn’t distinguish between team and 1-on-1 play) in a small data set. Drawing bigger conclusions from that is poor statistical analysis.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 21, 2009 9:56 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

This a better articulated version of what I thought when reading YP's above comment. I did a double take and re-read it

4 times just to make sure I wasn’t missing something. It’s a HUGE leap to say that someone is a good one on one defender simply because they have a high dAPM, which would be the necessary assumption to make the logical leap that YP made.

"Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy." --Newton

by fundamentallysound on May 21, 2009 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Here's my logic:

These players are all around 6’8", they don’t block shots, but they’re immensely strong, they had high steal rates in college, and they have high defensive APMs.

The only way they can have that much of a defensive impact is by being great on ball. Maybe they take a lot of charges, maybe they’re good at switching off screens, but that wouldn’t account for a +4.

I’m open to the possibility that I made a logical leap – I do tend to do that, and you’re right about it being a small sample size – but as far as Hayes, Najera, Landry, Evans being great on ball, I stand by it. I don’t see another way for a PF non-shotblocker to rack up those defense numbers.

by YaoPau on May 21, 2009 5:29 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Ok, fine. So the fact that Tyrus blocks 2-3 shots a game is enough to shell out 10 mill a year? Of course there’s more to the game than scoring and rebounding. But the bottom line is our starting PF should have that stat line every night. It is a must. The only thing Tyrus does above average is block shots. His man to man D is still not that great. I like Tyrus but he needs to do a hell of a lot more to earn that potential contract. Production not potential. This is gonna be year 4 for him. Make or break. Do or die. Dude should at least be getting 9 boards a night with his athleticism and physical abilities…it’s mainly up to his mental side to catch up. To know that he needs to box out on every possession, not jog back on defense, stop trying to get steals in the backcourt….etc..

by C Smoove on May 20, 2009 6:04 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

agree on

all the points of how tyrus needs to show more and become the player we have all been hoping he would become.

by Chisportfan on May 20, 2009 6:07 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

If TT was getting 9 boards a night he'd be getting 18 or 19 per 48.

That’d be pretty crazy.

Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.

by Prevenge on May 21, 2009 12:26 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Please stop the Blair band wagon

Leting you know the guy is marcus fizer reincarnate, and that aint a good thing. Pulling out all the numbers is nice and it does show improvements on paper that someone may miss otherwise. I do like that being a math teacher and all, but a teams cohesion and how they gel together and it all creates wins and losses is only and best described in one number……. wins and a certain degree losses.

I guess I am saying with the bulls being so young (mostly) we can expect a certain amount of improvement, but adding undersized players in a league dominated by height. Granted, athletic talent and basketball skills are needed by every player they can be helped overtime thru hard work and coaching. Height is the one thing that just is. Our beloved Bulls when they were “The BULLS” had not only the needed talent and skill, but almost every player was on the tall side for his postion.
My reason for why I would love Terrance Williams with the 16 pick. Get us an athletic big man at 26 and bingo we are good.

by Chisportfan on May 20, 2009 6:05 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

It's fine to not like Blair

  Or to think that some of us have him overrated, but don’t cite height.This link argues why height is a silly statistic and I agree with it. You just said to add an athletic big and T. Williams, but where in any mock draft do you see an athletic big man falling to 26. There are almost no big men in this draft.
  Additionally, one of the nice things about Blair is the fact that he’s known for being a good teammate, so cohesion may be one thing he helps bring to the team. Do I value Blair, yes, do I overvalue him, look at my little avatar picture :)

by Jamaicanpi on May 20, 2009 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Marcus Fizer and Blair aren't similar at all.

1st, they’re physically built differently.

More importantly Fizer and Blair don’t compare as rebounders. Fizer pulled down 7.7 in 33 minutes per game. Blair averaged 12.3 boards in 27 minutes per game last season. Rebounding translates to the next level more than other skill.

Blair is built to contribute as a role player in ways that Fizer was not because of the way he rebounds.

by Scotter on May 20, 2009 6:31 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Not only that, but people are sleeping on Blair's potential.

Right now he has no jump shot. None. He does, however, have huge hands, good touch, and a terrific work ethic, which leads me to think he’s jumpers gonna be good in the long run. In other words, he’ll be able to do more than just rebound and provide post defense.

We’ll need to trade up if we want him. God I hope we do.

The poster formerly known as Freethefro.

by MPG on May 21, 2009 8:56 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Blair is much better than Fizer

Comparing the two as sophomores:

Blair: 54 steals and 432 rebounds in 955 minutes
Fizer: 29 steals and 229 rebounds in 961 minutes

Looking back at the stats, Fizer was an easy bust-call.

by YaoPau on May 21, 2009 12:21 AM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

Fizer and Blair aren’t the same in terms of game. Blair is a far superior rebounder. Fizer could score and that was it. I think Blair’s rebounding numbers will translate to the pros. A lot of rebounding/post stuff is predicated off bulk and strength…look at Perkins(who I totally fucking hate). It’s not just about sheer height. Look at Aldridge who is damn near 7 foot but rebounds like a 6’5 guard. He doesn’t play up to this height.

I like Williams as our first pick. We already have two athletic but slightly built bigs in Tyrus/Noah. We need a banger type PF

by C Smoove on May 20, 2009 6:17 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

and it'll probably be Luol Deng :(

"Tact is the art of making a point without making an enemy." --Newton

by fundamentallysound on May 20, 2009 7:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Out on a limb there, fundie.

:)

Everything I post is speculation. I have no insider information nor ideas deemed concrete enough by those who are self-elected to regulate post content.

by cranscape on May 20, 2009 11:10 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

No way

Luol Deng never gets hurt!

Three things you must know:
-"Ben Gordon is a bundle of muscle and clutch. That's all he's made of. Drink BG7 energy drink, you'll grow a pair of balls on your balls."
-Pau Gasol: The defense of a seven foot ladder paired with the post presence of Manute Bol.
-Joakim Noah is better than you.

by Prevenge on May 21, 2009 12:27 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I Terrence Williams alot

He would be the perfect fit for our team, do it all guy with a great attitude that would make John Salmons expendable in a year or two.

by Bullsfanla on May 20, 2009 6:38 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Terrence Williams reminds me a lot of Salmons except he passes and plays better D…not sure about his scoring ability…but if he could contribute 10-12 points…it’s gravy.

by C Smoove on May 20, 2009 7:06 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Thanks for the work here, Yao;

always a good read.

The poster formerly known as Freethefro.

by MPG on May 21, 2009 8:58 AM CDT reply actions   0 recs

so let me get this straight...

…people don’t want to sign BG to a $10 mill/year contract, but they want to sign Tyrus to one? I love this blog…

http://awsomepeoplesearch.com/

by NormVanBeer on May 21, 2009 10:37 AM CDT reply actions   2 recs

A couple points

1. Good work. It takes a lot of time to crunch these numbers.

2. Scotter pointed out that this doesn’t project injuries. Given that 6 of the 8 Eastern Conference playoff teams faced major injury problems (Orlando, Boston, Chicago, Philly, Cleveland and Detroit) than its hard to project this out. Someone is going to get hurt.

3. I don’t know if you can just add up team APM with account taking into account the effect of losing Ben Gordon. Ben Gordon played so many minutes this season, its hard for me to believe that his individual performance doesn’t reflect on players APM’s both positiviely and negatively. Taking away a team’s #1 scoring option will undoubtedly effect how other player’s play. Just as there is no reason to believe that Salmons will go back to his Sacramento numbers if he continues to get the touches and looks that he got with Chicago. Offensive, defensive scheme and other players matter.

4. Sean May, Shelden Williams, Luther Head and Rashad McCants are awful. Really, the only decent player of the bunch is Sean May, but he is always injured and can’t keep his weight down. I don’t see how signing any of those guys as opposed to any other scrubs makes a difference.

by Basketball Smurf on May 21, 2009 1:24 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

The effect of losing Ben Gordon?

There may not be another player in the league who helps his teammates less than Gordon. Gordon and Salmons both have stats that correlate to a strong positive EOPM, but their offensive APM’s last year were +0.01 and -3.47 apiece. I’d argue that no Gordon means more passing and I wouldn’t be surprised if our offense is significantly better next season.

One theory I’m trying to work out is the effect of players who use up the shot clock with isolation dribbling that accomplishes nothing. Gordon and Salmons both do it, except dribbling for 15 seconds then passing for a quick reset doesn’t show up in the stat sheet even though it can kill an offense. In contrast, I’ve noticed several guys who suck but don’t hold onto the ball (Deng, Peja, Mike Miller) have strong offensive APMs.

by YaoPau on May 22, 2009 8:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

he was still first option in the offense

i don’t see how are offense is significantly better without him. Defensive schemes will change, and focus more on Rose. We have one less guy capable of hitting a shot off the dribble. I don’t understand why you brought ups Salmons -3.47 APM, it actually helps my argument. You are replacing Gordon in the offense with a significantly less gifted player, who is less willing to pass. Stories of Gordon’s over-dribbling are greatly exagerrated, and can be just as easily applied to Rose or Hinirich.

You are positing that removing Gordon will not have any effect on other players, on how defenses react to the Bulls, on how the Bulls run their offense. That doesn’t seem realistic to me at all. You are replacing the Bulls most efficient perimeter scorer, with 3 guys (Hinrich, Salmons, Deng) who aren’t as efficient. If Gordon isn’t on the floor, I’m more likely to double Rose. If there is no Gordon or Rose on the floor than only one player – Salmons – can beat his guy consistently off the dribble. The Bulls offense began to flourish when they had 3 perimeter players who could penetrate and score. Removing the most effective one of those guys will hurt the offense.

by Basketball Smurf on May 23, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

I should've clarified

It’s not “take out Gordon and offense improves!” It’s “Gordon made little difference, factor in the improvements of Rose, Noah, Tyrus, Deng and we’ll be better.”

The doubleteaming Rose theory doesn’t make sense to me. What coach would ever doubleteam the opponent’s best passer, and if they do, how is that a problem? Hinrich and Salmons can knock down open shots.

by YaoPau on May 23, 2009 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

in a sense, you are right

teams that double team Rose will have to pay by giving guys open shots. I am more confident about Gordon hitting those open shots than Rose. I guess I don’t believe there something inherently within Gordon preventing him from becoming a catch and shoot type player. He doesn’t need to dribble 15 times. VDN offense lacked structure at times so it led to guards over-dribbling. I think Gordon can be that run off screens, shoot open 3’s, not dribble 20 times guy. But you have to put an offense in for him to do it.

Another thing with double teaming – we saw Rose get double teamed a lot this year and disappear. Or he would double team and pass it to someone who couldn’t make a play. I have more confidence in Gordon making a play against a rotating defense than Salmons or Hinrich, and especially more confidence that he could make a play than any other player on the Bulls not listed. I guess I believe the chasm between Gordon and Salmons offensively is bigger than you think.

by Basketball Smurf on May 23, 2009 3:01 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I am more confident about Gordon hitting open shots than...

Hinrich and Salmons, is what I meant to say. Although, I am more confident in him hitting open shots than Rose as well :)

by Basketball Smurf on May 23, 2009 3:03 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

What is Joe Johnson doing in your list of "cheaper" free agents who might become available?
In the 2010 offseason, there are some other, cheaper free agents that fit, including Joe Johnson, Darius Songaila, Chuck Hayes, and Carl Landry.

Last I checked, he was a franchise player / All-Star / Olympic team member and one of the best 3-point shooters in the league going back about 3 seasons.

…Maybe you meant Amir Johnson?

"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris

by bullhockey on May 22, 2009 5:06 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Forgot to mention

Nice post, YaoPau

"It’d be ridiculous to hate someone for simply what they say in a sports blog. But I greatly dislike every syllable of your angst-filled, smarmy, nondescript, half-assed, elitist-garbage responses." –Rogerspark Kris

by bullhockey on May 22, 2009 5:09 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

like your

“unheraldeds” list, and basically in that order too.

we already have a better passing raja bell on the team. most everyone here is ready to trade him for cap relief. (even me?)

"As a basketball player gordon is a useless as tits on a a whore" - BigWay (Dec 2, 2008). BigWank, I'll miss you more than all the others. This song is for you, my brother!

by marionette on May 22, 2009 5:45 PM CDT reply actions   0 recs

Although I find myself in the strange positon of being more interested in keeping Hinrich around

than Gordon. But, maybe not so strange. Gordon was the obvious choice when the discussion was Gordon vs. Duhon. And Gordon was the obvious choice when it was a choice of simply starting Gordon or Hinrich at SG. But, it actually comes down to a choice between keeping Hinrich or Gordon I think there are both legitimate and financial reasons for keeping Hinrich over Gordon.

by Scotter on May 22, 2009 6:28 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

yes it is

quite the dilemma. i have no faith in ben toning down a bit, to where he’s no longer no 1, or “the man”, even as 6th man. dude should have a fg% much closer to 50% than 45%. but i could see it happen that way for him elsewhere.

hinrich would need some magical d’antoni confidence boost to get to raja-level 40+% from three. if he stays, and it works, it will definitely be a case of addition by subtraction. but i thought kirk and derrick looked fine together. maybe there are stats to prove otherwise?

mostly i’ve been saying to loose both, so i have to figure that means both will stay. :-D though i can’t imagine the l-tax will be hurdled.

"As a basketball player gordon is a useless as tits on a a whore" - BigWay (Dec 2, 2008). BigWank, I'll miss you more than all the others. This song is for you, my brother!

by marionette on May 22, 2009 7:41 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Hinrich shot 40% from 3 this season. Bell only shot significantly from 3 better

than Hinrich this season in one season. One of the things Kirk showed me was more consistency in catch and shoot situations. He’s still creating his own shot much more than a player like Bell.

Hinrich and Rose were +6 as a player pair. Rose and Gordon were negative for the year, but they also played huge minutes together when the team was terrible during the 1st half of the year. Hinrich and Gordon was the Bulls best player pair for the season at +10.

by Scotter on May 22, 2009 10:12 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

yea

thought i shoulda looked up this year for kirk after typing it. .408, and he made .415 in ‘06-’07 too. :-O but you/they get my point. although raja’s 41% career shouldn’t “feel” that much greater than kirk’s 38%, it does.

raja was a rare guy that, when pressured, would actually make a dribble or two in d’antoni’s system to get a mid range shot. it also rarely worked for him (one on one).

kirk+ben at +10 probably has somewhat to do with the second unit’s general superiority versus nba average, one would think.

"As a basketball player gordon is a useless as tits on a a whore" - BigWay (Dec 2, 2008). BigWank, I'll miss you more than all the others. This song is for you, my brother!

by marionette on May 22, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Some +10 is certainly partly backup effect, but over the years Gordon and Hinrich have been pretty

effective together. And Gordon and Hinrich was just better defensively than any combination with Rose on the court last season. There’s a reason the Bulls went to the playoffs with Hinrich and Gordon.

by Scotter on May 23, 2009 12:57 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i also used to think ben would bring more interest around the league. not now.

so, who should stay and who should go? remember, you’re a man of integrity. the decider. you can’t cheap out on it like me and say goodbye to both.

"As a basketball player gordon is a useless as tits on a a whore" - BigWay (Dec 2, 2008). BigWank, I'll miss you more than all the others. This song is for you, my brother!

by marionette on May 22, 2009 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Right now if I could only choose one to go with the current roster, I'd take Hinrich.

Hinrich’s contract doesn’t bother me that much. He’s getting 26.5 million over the next three years, which is that bad. And more importantly his contract meshes perfectly with that of Rose.. Hinrich’s salary drops when Derrick’s increases and ends right when Derrick’s 2nd contract begins. It sets up well for cap management. As long as Derrick is effectively underpaid, Hinrich can be over paid. Three years and 26.5 million for Hinrich bothers me less than 50-60 million over a longer term with Gordon.

Basketball wise I like a lot of what Hinrch brings to the table off the bench. He can get his 30-35 minutes by playing 10-15 minutes at PG behind Rose, and play another 20-25 minutes at SG. And then you have a true 2/3 starting at SG that can play 20-30 minutes at SG, and then slide over to backup the SF for 10-15 minutes if the player warrants more minutes. Rotationally letting Gordon go and moving Salmons to SG works well provided that Deng is healthy. If Hinrich is back to playing 30+ minutes his contract starts looking a lot better.

Hinrich off the bench makes a lot of sense. He can play aggressively without worrying about foul trouble. Most teams go to a small backcourt off the bench anyway so the matchups work well. Having strong defensive guards both backing up and playing with Rose is probably going to be important the next couple of years. An dI thought Rose and Gordon play well. That’s with the current roster though. There’s scenarios where choosing Gordon makes sense.

by Scotter on May 23, 2009 2:59 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Off-topic question Scotter

Do you know how basketball-reference gets its individual DRtg numbers? I’m finishing up Basketball on Paper, and I don’t understand how Individual DRtg is available for the past 30 years when nobody was tracking Stops. Is it just an estimation?

by YaoPau on May 23, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Stops are simply estimated nased on overalll team defense.

In the back of the book there’s the entire formula for calculating individual ORtg and DRtg. Every player gets equal credit for forcing missed shots,and the guys with more steals, blocks, and defensive rebounds end up having the better DRtgs. DRtg at B-R or the ratings I ’ve posted are calculated just from the boxscore stats.

by Scotter on May 23, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

So when I see Tyrus' DRtg was 104 this year

All that means is he was a Chicago Bull with more steals/blocks/drebs than his teammates? That seems almost completely useless.

by YaoPau on May 23, 2009 1:00 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i agree that as a 3rd guard

Hinrich is a better fit than Gordon. But i don’t think Hinrich can start at the 2, and I’m dubious as to whether Salmons has the quickness, passing or ball handling skills to play there. Everywhere Salmons has gone he has played the 3 and he played the 3 exclusively with Chicago.

In a perfect world I would be happy to keep both Hinrich and Gordon. But if you let Gordon walk, than I think you have to get a replacement 2. Or the Bulls will take a step back.

by Basketball Smurf on May 23, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Salmons played

a lot of SG for the Kings in 2009, played it primarily in 2008 and also in 2007.

He’s not a perfect complement to Rose, but I kinda like Salmons at the 2. His lack of any help defense won’t be exploited as much as it was at the 3.

by YaoPau on May 23, 2009 12:40 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd use caution with those

82games doesn’t tell you how they determine who is playing sg. From looking at the 5 man units, it looks like they considered Salmons the shooting guard when he was paired with Garcia. But does that mean Salmons was guarding or guarded by the opposing sg, it’s hard to know.

by Jamaicanpi on May 23, 2009 1:02 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

In 2008 and 2007, Artest was at SF for at least half of the time

Salmons was at SG. And according to Kings fans when Salmons and Garcia were on the court together and even when Salmons was playing SF and Martin SG, Salmons took the tougher cover. Salmons was the one assigned to cover Kobe for example. And at a minimum Salmons isn’t any worse guarding SGs than Gordon.

by Scotter on May 23, 2009 1:22 PM CDT up reply actions   1 recs

my concern with Salmons isn't on defense

(and this could be addressed to either YaoPau or Scotter) but on offense. I really worry about his lack of assists numbers. Next year is a contract year for Salmons, so he will likely be trying to play his absolute best. The concern is that he becomes an even bigger black hole on offense as the second primary ball handler on the court (when Kirk/Rose are out).

His assist / turnover numbers at the 2 look a lot like Gordon’s. But as I said above, the Bulls offense didn’t really take off until Salmons replaced Deng, and you had Gordon/Rose/Salmons and Hinrich as your perimeter rotation. All of those guys can penetrate and pass to varying degrees. Deng is a more willing passer than Gordon or Salmons, but he is not the creator either guy is. It seems to me that in VDN’s offense guys who can penetrate like Rose, Gordon, and Salmons flourished while guys who relied more on structure – Deng, Nocioni – struggled. On an offense designed to have your perimeter players attack off the dribble, replacing Gordon with Deng could cause the offense to falter once more. And since a great deal of the Bull success was predicated on being a very good offensive team through the last 1/3 of the season, I think that could be a potentially big set back.

On the other hand, that could mean more touches for Tyrus Thomas (which I know you support Scotter), because he has the ability to attack his man off the dribble. But I don’t know if he will be with the Bulls next season.

by Basketball Smurf on May 23, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Before the trade deadline...

….I was writing up a post about how letting Gordon go and making Tyrus Thomas the No. 2 option (or a co-No. 2 w/ Hinrich and Deng or something) would be one of those tough experiments that could pay off huge in the end… or be a total bust. I e-mailed Scotter to see if that sounded as crazy out loud as it almost did in my head.

But then Salmons came. He’s been a black hole in Chicago (maybe that changes w/ a summer of VDN’s “offensive system”), but there’s no way he’s NOT the No. 2 option next year. So then I just, whatever!

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 23, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Salmons has been a decent passer for his career

15.6 AST% is just below Gordon’s 17.3 AST%. Considering Salmons has played a lot of SF, that’s a solid number. Could be better, but solid.

My guess is his 8.8 AST% with the Bulls last year was an anomaly.

by YaoPau on May 23, 2009 3:54 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

I think it's part anomaly, but partly the offense.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 23, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Mostly the offense, me thinks.

"Vinny continues to act like a crazed arsonist pouring gasoline on our season while running around carrying a torch yelling 'I’m in charge. Don’t any of you foolish knaves try to second guess me. I know gasoline is a liquid but I’m pretty sure it isn’t flammable and the odor gives me a natural high.'" - Tyrusmancrush

by Illini15 on May 23, 2009 9:22 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, I think his lack of knowing the offense led him to go to his "strengths".

I would think most players who aren’t good passers but can create their own shot would probably have a lower assist rate when going to a new team, almost regardless of the offense.

People should remember that while they have the right to their opinion, they are not entitled to be taken seriously. --Bruce Bartlett

by tyger1147 on May 26, 2009 6:45 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

...let alone an offense

predicated purely on a one-on-one, playground-style, whateverthefuck style of play

"Vinny continues to act like a crazed arsonist pouring gasoline on our season while running around carrying a torch yelling 'I’m in charge. Don’t any of you foolish knaves try to second guess me. I know gasoline is a liquid but I’m pretty sure it isn’t flammable and the odor gives me a natural high.'" - Tyrusmancrush

by Illini15 on May 26, 2009 8:24 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

i think vinny's "offense" played a significant part also

salmons’ assist rate was ok when he was with sac last year. but luol and tyrus among others saw their assist rates drop from 07-08 so i think it was no coincidence that salmons’ assist numbers tanked when he came to the bulls especially since he was playing primarily at the 3 spot.

"They should. They better. I'm Vinny Del Negro!"

by Jaina on May 23, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

hinrich's a

better fit because it’s good to be a (true, effective) combo, if you only use three in rotation. ben’s always been an ideal 6th man. also, and i think scotter alludes to this, with salmons now here, hinrich fits well too. prevent early fouls and such. a year ago, i’d advocated thabo starting to help set a defensive tone, but knew kirk or ben or both would play the major minutes, would be in at the end. now salmons can, but that makes too many players with too few minutes at 1, 2, and 3. (assuming deng’s health, and that he won’t play much 4.)

smurf, you’re in az. do you remember how the suns wanted salmons, but god told him to go to sacramento? after that close call i was always aware of what salmons was doing there, especially because marcus banks bombed. he struck me as just what the suns hoped for, as sort of a low rent joe johnson. (they finally got grant hill, but grant’s better defending threes than twos.) i think salmons moved the ball around in sacramento better. artest was the “black hole” and kmartin was the chucker. so i’ll be shocked if scotter whips up a negative salmons sg post.

"As a basketball player gordon is a useless as tits on a a whore" - BigWay (Dec 2, 2008). BigWank, I'll miss you more than all the others. This song is for you, my brother!

by marionette on May 23, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to the SB Nation blog about Chicago Bulls.
Start posting about the Bulls »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Small
The Bulls and Young Talent
Blogabull_s_small
Sign up for BlogABull game previews

Recent FanPosts

Small
Kudos Bulls. You've surprised early.
Bolo_picture_small
What about Iverson?
Sports
I'm Happy to Have a Break From Tyrus. He's gone anyways.
Small
Game Preview # 6: Bulls vs Charlotte Bobcats
Small
Why isn't there more talk of LeBron...
Small
Contract/Cap Question for BAB
Jayhawk_small
Game Preview # 5: Bulls at Cleveland Cavaliers
Small
We've Got To Rescue D. Wade
Blogabull_s_small
Chad Ford Rounds up extensions and team options for recent draftees

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS


Guy who does everything

Blogabull_s_small your friendly BullsBlogger