Saying goodbye to the inept trio and other positives
[Another great Diary from sbulls9030. The main point is something very few prognosticators have noticed: Even without acquiring a 'low-post scorer', the Bulls' acquisitions should improve the offense from their frontcourt. -Matt]
One thing that is clear from NBA history is that teams with really good point differentials win championships. For the Bulls to be a championship caliber team, the Bulls must improve their point differential. Last year the Bulls finished 5th in the NBA in point differential by outscoring opposing teams by 5 points, but were still more than 3 points behind league leader and NBA champion San Antonio. This team will need to get closer to San Antonio's 8 point differential in order to compete for a championship. Dean Oliver's Four Factors summarize the four major categories that lead to point differential. Here are the four factor rankings for the Bulls last season along with each category's importance, what statistic it's measured by, and the Bulls ranking relative to the rest of the league. This chart makes it easy to see where the opportunities for improvement are. The Bulls must shoot better, take better care of the ball, and rebound better on both ends of the floor.
Factor Off (Rk) Def (Rk)
+------------+---------+----------+
Shootimg .493 (17) .473 ( 3) effective FG% = 40%
Turnovers .166 (24) .180 ( 2) turnovers/possessions = 25%
Rebounding .286 ( 9) .743 (10) rebound rates = 20%
Free Throws .229 (22) .252 (19) FTM/FGA = 15%
+------------+---------+----------+
The Bulls must become a better shooting team. Shooting is the most significant factor in point differential, and the needs to improve in this season. The issue here is not how many jump shots the Bulls take or a lack of the post play. The Bulls take about the same % of jump shots as any other team. The real issue with this team was its inability to make shots close to the basket. The Bulls finished dead last in close shot FG% at 50.1%. Average teams in this category shoot 55% on close shots and the leaders in this category shoot over 60% on close shots. Luckily this is an area that should improve this season because the team said goodbye to Malik Allen, Michael Sweetney, and P.J. Brown who combined to be simply awful last year.
Min ORtg DRtg PW PL PW%
Sweetney 385 91 98 0.5 1.3 0.262
Malik Allen 638 96 100 0.9 1.7 0.338
P.J. Brown 1455 95 100 1.9 3.7 0.340
That trio ate up 30 minutes of playing time per game, and took nearly 10 FGA/g with a combined FG% of 41.3%. Nocioni, Smith, Thomas, and Noah will not only shoot much better inside, but will turn many of those layups into dunks. One of the big questions here will be how well Thomas and Noah finish inside shots that they can't dunk. They don't need to be able to post people up, but they do need to be able to finish with a jump hook or a layup when they catch the ball close to the basket. Ben Wallace can help in this area as well. He's shown the ability to make over 50% as recently as 05/06.
Reducing turnovers is the second most significant task for this season. Gordon, Deng, Nocioni, Wallace, and Hinrich's turnover rates all increased last season. These five accounted for 70.4% of all the team's possessions with Deng, Gordon, and Hinrich accouting for over 53.5% of the team's possessions. Simply returning to their 05/06 turnover rates would reduce the Bulls turnovers by almost 2 per game. The secondary issue will be keeping Sefolosha, Thomas, and Noah's turnovers down to a manageable level. But, improvement here is the chief responsibility of Gordon, Deng, and Hinrich.
Rebounding is also a key area where I expect the team to improve. 9th and 10th in the league is good, but not good enough, especially on the defensive glass. The Bulls weren't a bad defensive rebounding team. But a lot of times last year it felt like it, as the opposing team grabbed offense rebound after offense rebound as our players stood glued to the ground. The Bulls will be replacing below average rebounders in P.J. Brown and Malik Allen. Brown, Allen. and Sweetney had a combined 13.4 rebound rate. Smith, Thomas, and Noah will each have a rebound rate of at least 15.0 and be above-average rebounders. If Sefolosha is able to play more minutes, he'll help in this area as well. Rebounding was the one area he clearly excelled at during his rookie season, and his rebound rate nearly doubles that of Hinrich, Gordon, or Duhon. Improving in this area is especially important if the Bulls have to play Cleveland in the playoffs as the Cavs are both offensively and defensively dependent on their rebounding advantage.
Finishing inside better, taking better care of the ball, and rebounding better are the three areas where the Bulls should and need to improve this season. Replacing the trio of Brown, Allen, and Sweetney with better more athletic players is a clear and often overlooked improvement. I was surprised that John Hollinger didn't get past the low post scoring issue enough to notice the impact of the change in frontcourt personnel. Improvement in these areas will not only help the Bulls finish better than 20th in offensive efficiency, but will help the defense be even better as well. For the 1st time in Skiles's tenure, all of his frontcourt players will have the necessary physical ability to trap and recover in the Bulls' defensive system. That combined with improved defensive rebounding and better offense creates a real opportunity for significant improvement in the league's best defense. There are clear opportunities to increase the team's point differential. By how much will depend on the improvement of the individual players.
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.
0 recs |
35
comments
Comments
What will help with the rebounding is . . .
by Big D on Oct 4, 2007 6:54 PM CDT 0 recs
Sweet analysis
by paxson43 on Oct 4, 2007 6:59 PM CDT 0 recs
I did some of the math, but there's so many moving
Based on last year, replacing Allen, Sweetney, and Brown should increase the point differential by 1.5 points. I'm not sure I want to predict a 58+ win season though. How much better is the rest of the Eastern conference better? That plays a role. Do Smith and Wallace decline as expected?
I'm cautiously optimistic that the Bulls will have at least 6.5 to 7 point differential next seaon, which puts them somewhere between 58-60 expected wins. The team doesn't need everything to go right to get to that level, but they do need Hinrich, Gordon, and Deng to stay healthy.
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 11:35 AM CDT
up
0 recs
chemistry after 1/01/07
by GWKD on
Oct 5, 2007 2:02 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Interesting thought,
From 1/1 through the close of the regular season, the overall point differential for the Bulls was 4.86 (assuming I can add, which isn't a given on a Friday afternoon). The point differential represents an average loss margin of 8.24 and an average won margin of 14.03. Their actual record was 30-21. Using an expected wins formula based on point differential (because I didn't add up up points for and against the first time, so the "usual" formula is out), the record should have been roughly 38-13.
If you are interested in the rough distribution of points margin for wins and losses over that period:
1-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 21+
Wins 7 6 6 4 7
Losses 9 6 5 0 1
by wjb1492 on
Oct 5, 2007 2:54 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Thank you God!
by joejoeEnglish94bulls4ever on Oct 5, 2007 1:28 AM CDT 0 recs
More donuts for the rest of us.
Too easy, sorry....
by cubbybear on
Oct 5, 2007 2:44 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Nice analysis, sbulls
by preverbal on Oct 5, 2007 9:35 AM CDT 0 recs
The big problem
by bullshooter on Oct 5, 2007 10:10 AM CDT 0 recs
Noc is a jumpshooter
by your friendly BullsBlogger on
Oct 5, 2007 10:27 AM CDT
up
0 recs
yeah, but...
by bullshooter on
Oct 5, 2007 12:38 PM CDT
up
0 recs
You don't have to convince me that Tyrus
I could understand the argument that defensively the Bulls aren't going to be able to get away with playing Noc and Thomas at the 4 and the 5 very ofeten. So Thomas and Smith is a good offensive duo that can survive defensively.
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 12:56 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I was mostly talking about efficiency
by bullshooter on
Oct 5, 2007 1:03 PM CDT
up
0 recs
That's an interesting point.
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 1:39 PM CDT
up
0 recs
you can't pick and roll effectively with Wallace
by bullshooter on
Oct 5, 2007 2:02 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I doubt it was effective, but Skiles
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 2:45 PM CDT
up
0 recs
The breakdown is solid
by Option27 on Oct 5, 2007 10:19 AM CDT 0 recs
Hollinger
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Oct 5, 2007 10:55 AM CDT 0 recs
Thanks sbulls
by stevekerrsfloppyhair on Oct 5, 2007 11:05 AM CDT 0 recs
Another great point
by your friendly BullsBlogger on Oct 5, 2007 11:09 AM CDT 0 recs
Great Diary
Obviously, for most Bulls fans, attacking the "No Low-Post Scorer" argument is the tasty nugget here. There are plenty of teams that don't have a traditional low-post scorer and nobody is going to convince me that getting rid of Eddy was a bad thing. It also speaks to the larger issue when we talk about the Bulls offseason moves. ...i.e., they should have a large impact on the frontcourt. We added height, fitness and energy. ...and alway seem to have lost is weight (an argument could be made for experience but Noah's a 'winner' that's played in the 'championship atmosphere').
Hopefully, Dwyer picks up this theme as I know he's A) on the Bulls bandwagon and B) a reader.
by CookDing on Oct 5, 2007 1:10 PM CDT 0 recs
Great diary
Only problem I have is with Hollinger's translation of point differential to wins. Here's my problem:
Bulls go up 14 with 6 minutes left. Our players pile it on because we think they can come back, our PD goes through the roof. Other team pulls starters, and our scrubs come in, and our scrubs and their scrubs are equally mediocre, our PD is about the same.
Does the difference between winning by 30 and winning by 10 mean something about the strength of the team in all cases? I would argue that it doesn't, and that the point differential is differentially affected by big losses and big wins, which in some cases have little to do with the team's relative strength.
by cubbybear on Oct 5, 2007 1:52 PM CDT 0 recs
It's not just Hollinger
Hollinger goes into this a fair bit in his free Spurs season preview on ESPN.
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 2:34 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I think the bulls are a little different
by bullshooter on
Oct 5, 2007 2:46 PM CDT
up
0 recs
I accept some of that, but
by Scotter on
Oct 5, 2007 4:42 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Are we looking at the same stats?
by bullshooter on
Oct 5, 2007 11:29 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Gordon makes 3 or 4 of his end of game shots
I agree there a reasons why the Bulls may under perfom their expected wins to a degree, but it mostly has to do with those end of game coin flips. The probability of a coin flip is always 50/50, but that doesn't stop tails from coming up five times in a row. The Spurs for example tend to under perform expected wins. Some of that can be attributed to style of play, but in 05/06 they out performed expected wins by 2 games. Last year, they under performed by six games. Did losing Nesterovic change their ability to win close games? Or was it mostly some bad end of game luck?
by Scotter on
Oct 6, 2007 12:51 AM CDT
up
0 recs
What are the odds
by bullshooter on
Oct 6, 2007 12:48 PM CDT
up
0 recs
Agreeing & excited, but still concerned.
Great analysis though. But I don't think it tears down the "could use post-scoring" criticism completely. I know we're sick of the critics (Charles Barkely, virtually every preseason prognosticator) giving us that refrain, but they have a point. They're saying the Bulls sorely need inside scoring to balance their outside game. You're saying, among other things, that the team should improve its shooting percentage around the basket, and that it'd be nice if one of the bigs had a jump hook. Is that dramatically different?
I guess it's a good rejoinder to those who think the only way the team can improve was to get someone like Gasol. But I hope Pax doesn't give up searching. Utah had a decent point differential last year and Sloan gets his guys to "play the right way." But having someone like Boozer didn't hurt.
by T Maple on Oct 5, 2007 9:50 PM CDT 0 recs
but maybe Skiles is echoing the optimism
"Tyrus (Thomas) is improving down there," Skiles said. "Joakim (Noah) has got kind of a clever post game. Thabo (Sefolosha) has a pretty good post-up game. I'd like to take a good look at everybody."
by T Maple on
Oct 6, 2007 12:13 AM CDT
up
0 recs
You beat me to posting the article.
by Scotter on
Oct 6, 2007 12:34 AM CDT
up
0 recs
That's alot of good stuff to respond to
The broader solution to that problem is the ability to isolate and exploit mismatches. Post scoring is one piece to that solution, and it rests mostly on Deng's shoulders. He needs to be able to at least exploit size mismatches. The other over looked solution is having a PF or a C who can face up and drive by slower defenders. That's Thomas's job. Even without a jumpshot, his FT rate is indicative of his ability to blow by defenders. He obviously needs to be smarter about when to drive and improve his ability to finish layups, but the physical ability is clearly there. This is a role Noah may also be able to fill as well, especially if he's playing center given his physical attributes. The ability to isolate and exploit is critical for the Bulls can be developed internally. The offense doesn't need to revolve around isolations, but it needs to be part of the package.
Tyrus and Noah having a jump hook doesn't mean they will be able to score in the post. Shooting a jumphook after catching the ball in the paint off penetration or an offensive rebound is significantly different than gaining post position and shooting it with a defender on your back. One example of this is that Deng can do the former well right now, but not the latter. Tyrus and Noah need to be able to do the former, but the latter isn't nearly as important given their physical attributes.
It's interesting that you highlight Boozer, because he's a player that works for my argument. Boozer scores a ton inside, but he doesn't post up very often. He gets inside by moving without the ball, not posting up. He's a bigger stronger version of Luol Deng. That's the type of inside scoring the Bulls can get without posting up if their bigs can actually put the ball in the basket when they catch it inside.
This just posted K.C. Johnson article actually addresses several of my arguments.
http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sports/basketball/bulls/cs-071005bullsbits,1,2451586.story?c oll=cs-bulls-headlines
by Scotter on
Oct 6, 2007 12:32 AM CDT
up
0 recs
Wow, now that's good timing.
by T Maple on
Oct 6, 2007 11:17 AM CDT
up
0 recs










