If only we had realized when AK was first brought on and it was widely touted that he had free reign to do as he wanted with the Bulls, it was because Jerry and Michael specifically picked him because they knew he'd run the team exactly as they wanted it to be run.
I don't think it's quite as unlimited as Paxson (or Gar for that matter) and if they don't win the lottery and keep not making the playoffs they'll be gone in a year or two. But that's still way too long a leash.
What is the best move that AKME has made? Signing Caruso or DeMar as free agents? Their drafts haven’t been good and most of their trades have been disastrous..
Signing/trading for Lonzo, Caruso, and Demar when they first got hired is the feather in the cap for AKME. Since that happened they haven't made a single move worth mentioning.
Ayo is their only good draft pick. Everybody else has been underwhelming(PW, Phillips) to straight up bad(Terry). Buzelis is looking like more of the same
I'd say Caruso is easily their best move because they didn't give up anything for him and his contract was fairly cheap. DeMar was obviously great for the Bulls, but they gave up a lot to get him and arguably overpaid for him. At the time, a lot of people thought he wasn't worth what the Bulls gave him. Not saying he wasn't a good acquisition; mostly just saying it wasn't a perfect signing like Caruso was. Ayo is probably a highlight for them too, although nobody expected him to still be available when it was the Bulls' turn to pick, so AKME didn't have to think much on that one.
There are at least trade rumors for the Bulls, that would be something, otherwise this team is on track for some solid play-in matchups vs the Hawks and the Heat.
If Brooklyn makes a trade, then the Bulls just have to be better than BKN, CHO, PHI, WAS and TOR. That's almost a guarantee. PHI is the wild card but all the other teams are clear about what they're doing.
I think TOR and CHO have more wins in them. But you're right BKN will go down.
but even so "making the play-in" doesn't matter as long as they don't make the playoffs, the lottery position is slotted in by record not conference standing
Well now CHO is a contender again. LaMelo is out for weeks and given his history it'll be months. They already lost Grant Williams for the season. Jordan is no longer the owner so they probably won't be as dumb with play-in dreams as before
AKME wishes they could build a tank like the Wizards (or maybe not). Instead they keep churning out these purgatory ass rosters. And we all know why they're doing it. The Reinsdorf's aren't interested in acquiring a star player. A star player increases your odds of doing stuff like winning games, going to the playoffs, or quite possibly winning an NBA title. And the Reinsdorf's ain't in the title winning business no more. The Bulls haven't won a playoff series since 2015. They ain't bout to start winning em again this season either. This is why I watch from a distance, but invest my time in teams ACTUALLY TRYING TO COMPETE. I don't wish bad things on folks, but Jerry Reinsdorf needs to kick the bucket man. Maybe his son will move differently once he's 6 ft under....
I don't know how much of this to take seriously but Hoophype is filled with snippets from Jake Fischer who now writes for Marc Stein's paywalled substack. Among these:
1. Pat Williams is being "shopped"
2. There are no takers
3. Few of LaVine's past suitors are interested
4. Karnisovas plans to hold a meeting with Vuc and LaVine and their reps in December to decide what to do.
So, in order:
1. So they're trying to do-over moves they made in July, for a guy they watched for 4 years.
2. Not surprising, the only players they seem to want to trade all have bad contracts.
3. Whatever, I don't think LaVine moves before Ingram moves. If Ingram doesn't move, I don't think Zach does.
4. Did these cheeseballs have anything like "a plan"? Not a masterplan, just any plan at all?
Their off-season now comes down to a few "oops, didn't mean that" and "idk send me a gcal invite for 6 months from now."
shows the low bar for this team having 'activity' that it was huge news that they're rumored to want to trade the guys they have wanted to trade for 18 months
like I suppose it is surprising that they'd even listen on Vuc, as 'logic' doesn't apply there
and who could've foreseen it would be harder to do this in-season and the 'showcasing' means nothing?
This is it exactly. This would have been the season when a Reinsdorfian demolition would have actually been part of a well-executed long-term strategy. Probably 10 to 12 teams have about $10 million in salary they really need to get rid of. Having that cap space would have lead to replenishing picks instantly. Using free agency for the purpose of acquiring players other teams might want for a pick would have been competent, though for these guys that's an incomprehensible act of madness.
Anyway it doesn't matter, the actual players Chicago has that other teams want are apparently off the table. Jalen Smith has predictably gone ice cold after another torrid start (first 9 games; 41% from 3; last 9: 29%). Nobody would want the contract for 3 years anyway, so they acquired another asset that serves no purpose. And this team has declared an 18ppg player untouchable. Madness.
This is something a lot of Bulls fans seem to be forgetting. A lot of other teams also have pieces they're trying to get rid of, and a lot of those pieces are also pretty good and on much better contracts.
Just because Zach and Vooch are playing well doesn't mean every buyer is going to be lined up at the door. They're playing well but they both still have large, non-expiring contracts.
Yes, kudos to the organization for building a culture of shooting a ton and not needing to play defense and losing games. I can't believe Vuc and LaVine got on board!
Those stories are hysterical, not in the sense of "very funny" but "stark raving mad and out of contact with reality."
The Bulls are currently **24th** in a 30 team league, sure they're "within striking distance" of being in the middle of the pack but I can't imagine how that is supposed to happen. Their longest winning streak is TWO GAMES (achieved once, over a month ago). They're not even playing .500 ball recently, and Zach LaVine's "great season" appears to be a transformation into a Cam Thomas-level player.
Which is more likely to happen: the team plays .500 ball or loses 4 in a row?
To be fair, I think we've gotten so used to this team "over achieving" to get to mediocre that we're all kind of scared they could possibly do it again.
I expected them to be bottom 5 and still do, even without a trade. You can see the difference in replacing Giddey with a basic above average defender, and that's probably true across the board. The fit on this team is really bad and that means they're going to be horrible in close games (though I sort of wonder if that stat might not get manipulated by the fact that opponents can almost score-at-will against the Bulls because there are so many exploitable players, meaning a "close game" 6 minutes out turns into a 10 point loss when bored teams decide to start executing.)
I guess maybe I'm just not as optimistic (pessimistic?) as you are. It's not that I don't think this team is bad and poorly constructed. It's more just that I think there are several other teams that are equally as bad and I trust their front offices to have more direction than ours.
They have two guys supposedly doing well, Zach and Vucevic (look, their ppg are above 20!) They still are bottom 6 right now and can't win 2 games in a row even with them. I don't think they would fall through the floor without them or anything — a competent defender at either spot would probably improve the team overall. (We're talking about exceptionally minor differences here, the difference between an 18 win team and 28 win team is not very great.)
I guess I should probably clarify. I'm not saying I think this team might actually secretly be mediocre. I'm just saying I'd rather they be Wizards-levels of bad so they can practically guarantee themselves a 25% chance at the #1 pick.
As you say, we're talking about exceptionally minor differences that could be the difference between an 18 win team and a 28 win team. Something like being the only team that sits in the top six in both 3PA (third) and 3P% (sixth). I don't expect their percentage to stay as high as it is, but through the first quarter of the season they're shooting well enough from deep to win them some games they shouldn't be winning.
there was a semantic discussion post-game where Will insisted the Bulls aren't "bad" but "mediocre" because they weren't bottom-4. Like only the Wizards could be considered bad and properly tanking.
he's so *worried* every game about the result. Every game it's "Bulls need to have 100% certainty of keeping the pick and can't even have the near-100% chance that four teams won't jump them" and "the Bulls need a star and this is the only way to do that". He should instead stick to his guns of evaluating process, and AKME's process is shit. That's why it's so dire. Just say that these guys should be fired already!
Would AK ever draft Payton Pritchard? Too old? Did he start too much in college? Not enough of a project? No upside? Too earth bound? That dude is a killer and it's demoralizing as hell, and Bulls will never have him or anybody like him on the team.
Zach is interesting, his great shooting efficiency this season has been noted but I would argue that pace is actually masking a noticeable degradation. Pace-adjusted, his scoring puts him just outside the top 40 in the NBA for the first time in years (for all of his prime he's been inside the top 20, twice inside the top 10). That's a huge drop-off in scoring proficiency.
He's taking far more 3s than he ever has — his 3pt Rate is at a career high, but his FT Rate is the lowest it's ever been since he was 21 and in Minnesota. Per 100, his FGAs are also lower than they've been in Chicago (even a tiny tick lower than last year's nightmare season).
Maybe you can't argue with the results: he's shooting less, with a lower usage%, and making more of them, than he has in a long time. I think he's a different player now, though and I suspect other teams are seeing this. (Playing uptempo to invoke D'Antoni Stat Inflation impresses fans but, judging by the career of Kendall Marshall, doesn't really fool anyone who does this for a living.)
Isn't that a good thing though? Zach is basically proving he can still be uber efficient while playing within an offense where he's not dominating the ball.
Basically any team that would be interested in him would want him playing within their system, not jacking up 25 shots a night.
I'm not sure of that. The thing is that Zach's defense is so bad, that you need him to compensate for it on the other end. And the only way he can do it is by having a really high usage rate with good efficiency.
A guy who is a bad defender but a good shooter needs to shoot A LOT to be worth 40 million bucks (or even be a starter on a contender).
Also, I suspect that it may be seen as a red flag that he isn't taking more shots in a team as offensively challenged as the Bulls.
The goal is for him to shoot a lot but not have the ball in his hands a lot. There's a difference. He's currently showing he can still score at will, even though he has the ball in his hands a lot less. That's what other teams want to know.
Can they insert him into the starting lineup and run an effective offense where he isn't handling the ball much but is still getting up 15+ shots a game and shooting efficiently? I'd say going into this season that was a bit of an unknown because he has pretty much always had the ball in his hands a ton during his time in Chicago.
That's a bad statistic to use. If he averages 5 turnovers a game while touching the ball 50 times per game, he'd have the same turnover rate as if he turned the ball over 2.5 times a game while only touching the ball 25 times.
But if you're able to keep his shot attempts similar while reducing his touches (kind of the whole point we're talking about), his scoring remains efficient while reducing the possibilities for him to turn the ball over.
So yes, if he gets traded to a team that uses him more off-ball while still getting him a similar number of shots per game, his turnover rate will likely stay consistent. His turnovers per game will be down though because he's touching the ball less, and ultimately that's what you want. You want him shooting but you don't want him handling the ball and trying to create with others.
Edit: And to clarify, he still has the ball in his hands here more than he should, which adds to his turnovers. We all know how many stupid turnovers he's had late in games this year where he's trying to run the offense.
The point is not to say what he's been doing this season is exactly what another team would do with him. The point is that he's showing he can still score efficiently and on high volume despite his usage going down. Most good teams would like reduce his usage even more while turning him into more of an off-ball scorer.
I cited both TO% and pace-adjusted. Your example applies to one but not the other. And they are not "keeping his shot attempts similar" — he's shooting less overall (pace-adjusted again) and getting to the line less.
I don't think this is part of a master plan. I don't see any indication this is "the goal." It think it's just how Zach is playing. I can't imagine anyone with an interest in his future thinks "let's get this guy out of the top 40 scorers" is beneficial for any purpose. The reason he's paid what he is is solely because he was once a fixture in the top 10.
> “We’ve got to develop Julian (Phillips) and Dalen (Terry) and Matas,” Donovan said before Monday’s win. “They’ve got to get playing time. But they also have to understand, it’s not free candy. If every night you’re just penned in for 25 minutes regardless of what you do — I just don’t know if guys can develop like that.”
Donovan is doing a great job developing Matas IMO. He's giving him longer leashes but holding him accountable and not making it a given that he's out there when he shouldn't be.
Folks should stop living game to game on how many minutes a 19 year old plays. He's come along from obviously clueless and terrible to looking like he knows what he's doing.
I don't see any tension there at all. He's saying they need to develop them, but they're not going to give them charity minutes. That's the right way.
I just feel such a sense of nihilism with the Bulls now because AK apparently has unlimited leash from ownership.
If only we had realized when AK was first brought on and it was widely touted that he had free reign to do as he wanted with the Bulls, it was because Jerry and Michael specifically picked him because they knew he'd run the team exactly as they wanted it to be run.
I don't think it's quite as unlimited as Paxson (or Gar for that matter) and if they don't win the lottery and keep not making the playoffs they'll be gone in a year or two. But that's still way too long a leash.
What is the best move that AKME has made? Signing Caruso or DeMar as free agents? Their drafts haven’t been good and most of their trades have been disastrous..
Signing/trading for Lonzo, Caruso, and Demar when they first got hired is the feather in the cap for AKME. Since that happened they haven't made a single move worth mentioning.
Drafting Ayo is a hit. Getting anything in round 2 is a hit.
"Getting anything in round 2 is a hit."
I don't know. Even if Phillips turns into a decent rotation piece, is giving up two future seconds just to draft him that much of a hit?
it's a half a hit, which in round two would be a hit
Ayo is their only good draft pick. Everybody else has been underwhelming(PW, Phillips) to straight up bad(Terry). Buzelis is looking like more of the same
I'd say Caruso is easily their best move because they didn't give up anything for him and his contract was fairly cheap. DeMar was obviously great for the Bulls, but they gave up a lot to get him and arguably overpaid for him. At the time, a lot of people thought he wasn't worth what the Bulls gave him. Not saying he wasn't a good acquisition; mostly just saying it wasn't a perfect signing like Caruso was. Ayo is probably a highlight for them too, although nobody expected him to still be available when it was the Bulls' turn to pick, so AKME didn't have to think much on that one.
There are at least trade rumors for the Bulls, that would be something, otherwise this team is on track for some solid play-in matchups vs the Hawks and the Heat.
I don't think they will be able to trade either Vuc or LaVine for the same reason they haven't so far.
But even so they will be out of the play-in. Or if they are in the East is so bad as long as they don't win the play-in games they'll be top 8 lottery
If Brooklyn makes a trade, then the Bulls just have to be better than BKN, CHO, PHI, WAS and TOR. That's almost a guarantee. PHI is the wild card but all the other teams are clear about what they're doing.
I think TOR and CHO have more wins in them. But you're right BKN will go down.
but even so "making the play-in" doesn't matter as long as they don't make the playoffs, the lottery position is slotted in by record not conference standing
3 time play-in losers Chicago Bulls? Say it ain't so ...
Well now CHO is a contender again. LaMelo is out for weeks and given his history it'll be months. They already lost Grant Williams for the season. Jordan is no longer the owner so they probably won't be as dumb with play-in dreams as before
Nets beat Suns, Hawks beat Cavs, both on the road 🙃
AKME wishes they could build a tank like the Wizards (or maybe not). Instead they keep churning out these purgatory ass rosters. And we all know why they're doing it. The Reinsdorf's aren't interested in acquiring a star player. A star player increases your odds of doing stuff like winning games, going to the playoffs, or quite possibly winning an NBA title. And the Reinsdorf's ain't in the title winning business no more. The Bulls haven't won a playoff series since 2015. They ain't bout to start winning em again this season either. This is why I watch from a distance, but invest my time in teams ACTUALLY TRYING TO COMPETE. I don't wish bad things on folks, but Jerry Reinsdorf needs to kick the bucket man. Maybe his son will move differently once he's 6 ft under....
I think they'd be ok with a star player as long as the player is on a rookie contract
and a superstar player if they brought in value above the max. But a properly paid high-money player, no sir.
Magic Game Thread is UP https://open.substack.com/chat/posts/e1a6e623-0ad7-4da9-bc7f-54b411580eb5
Petty hedonist
I don't know how much of this to take seriously but Hoophype is filled with snippets from Jake Fischer who now writes for Marc Stein's paywalled substack. Among these:
1. Pat Williams is being "shopped"
2. There are no takers
3. Few of LaVine's past suitors are interested
4. Karnisovas plans to hold a meeting with Vuc and LaVine and their reps in December to decide what to do.
So, in order:
1. So they're trying to do-over moves they made in July, for a guy they watched for 4 years.
2. Not surprising, the only players they seem to want to trade all have bad contracts.
3. Whatever, I don't think LaVine moves before Ingram moves. If Ingram doesn't move, I don't think Zach does.
4. Did these cheeseballs have anything like "a plan"? Not a masterplan, just any plan at all?
Their off-season now comes down to a few "oops, didn't mean that" and "idk send me a gcal invite for 6 months from now."
shows the low bar for this team having 'activity' that it was huge news that they're rumored to want to trade the guys they have wanted to trade for 18 months
like I suppose it is surprising that they'd even listen on Vuc, as 'logic' doesn't apply there
and who could've foreseen it would be harder to do this in-season and the 'showcasing' means nothing?
Ingram just changed representation to now #BeKlutch
So I suppose their rep is still intact even though they can't get Zach out of town
meanwhile look at tonight's opponent and see how their veterans trade value is talked about
https://www.hoopsrumors.com/2024/12/nets-notes-johnson-schroder-finney-smith-sharpe-bogdanovic.html
it's entirely due to their contracts. Like it helps that Schroeder is playing out of his mind but what's really valuable is he's expiring at $13M.
Cam Johnson makes the same as Vuc, but actually plays defense and is 5 years younger.
making the All-Star team makes nearly negligible difference in Vuc or LaVine's trade value
This is it exactly. This would have been the season when a Reinsdorfian demolition would have actually been part of a well-executed long-term strategy. Probably 10 to 12 teams have about $10 million in salary they really need to get rid of. Having that cap space would have lead to replenishing picks instantly. Using free agency for the purpose of acquiring players other teams might want for a pick would have been competent, though for these guys that's an incomprehensible act of madness.
Anyway it doesn't matter, the actual players Chicago has that other teams want are apparently off the table. Jalen Smith has predictably gone ice cold after another torrid start (first 9 games; 41% from 3; last 9: 29%). Nobody would want the contract for 3 years anyway, so they acquired another asset that serves no purpose. And this team has declared an 18ppg player untouchable. Madness.
This is something a lot of Bulls fans seem to be forgetting. A lot of other teams also have pieces they're trying to get rid of, and a lot of those pieces are also pretty good and on much better contracts.
Just because Zach and Vooch are playing well doesn't mean every buyer is going to be lined up at the door. They're playing well but they both still have large, non-expiring contracts.
Celtics game thread! it's up! NBA CUP https://open.substack.com/chat/posts/7ed5a6d4-cd79-4b0e-9dee-5af99db0723c
I must've see a different game last night
https://www.bleachernation.com/bulls/2024/11/30/chicago-bulls-too-good/
https://allchgo.com/chicago-bulls-new-identity-nba-cup-2024/
Yes, kudos to the organization for building a culture of shooting a ton and not needing to play defense and losing games. I can't believe Vuc and LaVine got on board!
Those stories are hysterical, not in the sense of "very funny" but "stark raving mad and out of contact with reality."
The Bulls are currently **24th** in a 30 team league, sure they're "within striking distance" of being in the middle of the pack but I can't imagine how that is supposed to happen. Their longest winning streak is TWO GAMES (achieved once, over a month ago). They're not even playing .500 ball recently, and Zach LaVine's "great season" appears to be a transformation into a Cam Thomas-level player.
Which is more likely to happen: the team plays .500 ball or loses 4 in a row?
These people have air bubbles in their head.
To be fair, I think we've gotten so used to this team "over achieving" to get to mediocre that we're all kind of scared they could possibly do it again.
I expected them to be bottom 5 and still do, even without a trade. You can see the difference in replacing Giddey with a basic above average defender, and that's probably true across the board. The fit on this team is really bad and that means they're going to be horrible in close games (though I sort of wonder if that stat might not get manipulated by the fact that opponents can almost score-at-will against the Bulls because there are so many exploitable players, meaning a "close game" 6 minutes out turns into a 10 point loss when bored teams decide to start executing.)
I guess maybe I'm just not as optimistic (pessimistic?) as you are. It's not that I don't think this team is bad and poorly constructed. It's more just that I think there are several other teams that are equally as bad and I trust their front offices to have more direction than ours.
They have two guys supposedly doing well, Zach and Vucevic (look, their ppg are above 20!) They still are bottom 6 right now and can't win 2 games in a row even with them. I don't think they would fall through the floor without them or anything — a competent defender at either spot would probably improve the team overall. (We're talking about exceptionally minor differences here, the difference between an 18 win team and 28 win team is not very great.)
I guess I should probably clarify. I'm not saying I think this team might actually secretly be mediocre. I'm just saying I'd rather they be Wizards-levels of bad so they can practically guarantee themselves a 25% chance at the #1 pick.
As you say, we're talking about exceptionally minor differences that could be the difference between an 18 win team and a 28 win team. Something like being the only team that sits in the top six in both 3PA (third) and 3P% (sixth). I don't expect their percentage to stay as high as it is, but through the first quarter of the season they're shooting well enough from deep to win them some games they shouldn't be winning.
tank-brain is serious
there was a semantic discussion post-game where Will insisted the Bulls aren't "bad" but "mediocre" because they weren't bottom-4. Like only the Wizards could be considered bad and properly tanking.
he's so *worried* every game about the result. Every game it's "Bulls need to have 100% certainty of keeping the pick and can't even have the near-100% chance that four teams won't jump them" and "the Bulls need a star and this is the only way to do that". He should instead stick to his guns of evaluating process, and AKME's process is shit. That's why it's so dire. Just say that these guys should be fired already!
Would AK ever draft Payton Pritchard? Too old? Did he start too much in college? Not enough of a project? No upside? Too earth bound? That dude is a killer and it's demoralizing as hell, and Bulls will never have him or anybody like him on the team.
He can shoot, that's a cheat code not part of the Bulls grind
Zach is interesting, his great shooting efficiency this season has been noted but I would argue that pace is actually masking a noticeable degradation. Pace-adjusted, his scoring puts him just outside the top 40 in the NBA for the first time in years (for all of his prime he's been inside the top 20, twice inside the top 10). That's a huge drop-off in scoring proficiency.
He's taking far more 3s than he ever has — his 3pt Rate is at a career high, but his FT Rate is the lowest it's ever been since he was 21 and in Minnesota. Per 100, his FGAs are also lower than they've been in Chicago (even a tiny tick lower than last year's nightmare season).
Maybe you can't argue with the results: he's shooting less, with a lower usage%, and making more of them, than he has in a long time. I think he's a different player now, though and I suspect other teams are seeing this. (Playing uptempo to invoke D'Antoni Stat Inflation impresses fans but, judging by the career of Kendall Marshall, doesn't really fool anyone who does this for a living.)
Isn't that a good thing though? Zach is basically proving he can still be uber efficient while playing within an offense where he's not dominating the ball.
Basically any team that would be interested in him would want him playing within their system, not jacking up 25 shots a night.
I'm not sure of that. The thing is that Zach's defense is so bad, that you need him to compensate for it on the other end. And the only way he can do it is by having a really high usage rate with good efficiency.
A guy who is a bad defender but a good shooter needs to shoot A LOT to be worth 40 million bucks (or even be a starter on a contender).
Also, I suspect that it may be seen as a red flag that he isn't taking more shots in a team as offensively challenged as the Bulls.
The goal is for him to shoot a lot but not have the ball in his hands a lot. There's a difference. He's currently showing he can still score at will, even though he has the ball in his hands a lot less. That's what other teams want to know.
Can they insert him into the starting lineup and run an effective offense where he isn't handling the ball much but is still getting up 15+ shots a game and shooting efficiently? I'd say going into this season that was a bit of an unknown because he has pretty much always had the ball in his hands a ton during his time in Chicago.
He's been pretty good with the ball recently too, 19 assists 4 TOV in his last 5 games.
I wouldn't say that: his TOs/100 and TO Rate are higher than they've been since 2021. He's still coughing it up despite touching the ball less.
That's a bad statistic to use. If he averages 5 turnovers a game while touching the ball 50 times per game, he'd have the same turnover rate as if he turned the ball over 2.5 times a game while only touching the ball 25 times.
But if you're able to keep his shot attempts similar while reducing his touches (kind of the whole point we're talking about), his scoring remains efficient while reducing the possibilities for him to turn the ball over.
So yes, if he gets traded to a team that uses him more off-ball while still getting him a similar number of shots per game, his turnover rate will likely stay consistent. His turnovers per game will be down though because he's touching the ball less, and ultimately that's what you want. You want him shooting but you don't want him handling the ball and trying to create with others.
Edit: And to clarify, he still has the ball in his hands here more than he should, which adds to his turnovers. We all know how many stupid turnovers he's had late in games this year where he's trying to run the offense.
The point is not to say what he's been doing this season is exactly what another team would do with him. The point is that he's showing he can still score efficiently and on high volume despite his usage going down. Most good teams would like reduce his usage even more while turning him into more of an off-ball scorer.
I cited both TO% and pace-adjusted. Your example applies to one but not the other. And they are not "keeping his shot attempts similar" — he's shooting less overall (pace-adjusted again) and getting to the line less.
I don't think this is part of a master plan. I don't see any indication this is "the goal." It think it's just how Zach is playing. I can't imagine anyone with an interest in his future thinks "let's get this guy out of the top 40 scorers" is beneficial for any purpose. The reason he's paid what he is is solely because he was once a fixture in the top 10.
Billy Donovan attacks Billy Donovan:
> “We’ve got to develop Julian (Phillips) and Dalen (Terry) and Matas,” Donovan said before Monday’s win. “They’ve got to get playing time. But they also have to understand, it’s not free candy. If every night you’re just penned in for 25 minutes regardless of what you do — I just don’t know if guys can develop like that.”
were_all_trying_to_find_the_guy_who_did_this-hotdog_car.jpg
Donovan is doing a great job developing Matas IMO. He's giving him longer leashes but holding him accountable and not making it a given that he's out there when he shouldn't be.
Folks should stop living game to game on how many minutes a 19 year old plays. He's come along from obviously clueless and terrible to looking like he knows what he's doing.
I don't see any tension there at all. He's saying they need to develop them, but they're not going to give them charity minutes. That's the right way.
If that was the right way then Billy Donovan has a bone to pick with that guy who gave minutes to Patrick Williams?
Probably so. Seems like a pretty obvious lesson has been learned.