SB Nation User Blog: Scotter

Putting this Year's Team in Context

Scotter — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 19:59:37 -0000

I thought I'd take a look at how this year's team compares to the Bulls teams over the last few years in the Four Factors categories. If your not familiar with the Four Factors, this is a way to break basketball down into it's four basic statistical categories (Field goal shooting, turnovers, rebounding, and free throw shooting). Field goal shooting is the most important category (50%), followed by turnovers (25%), then rebounding (20%), and then free throw shooting (15%).

		Offense
Year	Ortg	eFG%	TOV%	ORB%	FTM/FTA
(08/09)	105.4(19)	.483(21)	.139(19)	.278(9)	.225(21)
(07/08)	103.9(26)	.470(28)	.134(16)	.289(8)	.223(19)
(06/07)	104.9(22)	.493(17)	.147(23)	.286(9)	.229(22)
(05/06)	104.0(24)	.487(19)	.139(21)	.263(19)	.216(26)
(04/05)	101.4(27)	.471(24)	.155(30)	.284(18)	.233(22)

		Defense
Year	DRtg	eFG%	TOV%	DRB%	FTM/FTA
(08/09)	108.4(19)	.488(15)	.132(20)	.705(29)	.250(21)
(07/08)	107.2(14)	.496(11)	.142(5)	.731(18)	.258(25)
(06/07)	99.6(1)	.473(3)	.162(1)	.743(10)	.252(19)
(05/06)	103.4(7)	.464(3)	.139(11)	.747(5)	.295(29)
(04/05)	101.4(2)	.454(2)	.144(8)	.726(7)	.262(22)

Offensively not much has really changed from the Skiles era. There's more offensive potential on the roster than the Skiles era, but very little of it has been realized so far. Defense is where the changes have happened. The team has slid in the three most important categories on the side of the ball they could not afford to slide. And a big part of the problem in all three areas is the lineups that Vinny has relied on.

Field goal shooting defense has continued it's slide from last season. What's interesting is last season, the team struggled defending the 3-point line allowing opponents to shoot 37.5% (26th). This season the Bulls are only allowing 33.4% from 3 (6th), but they can't defend the paint

This team also no longer creates turnovers on defense. This is largely a product of the lineups Vinny plays and changes in roster makeup, but it is also may be partly a product of Vinny's system. D'Antoni's defensive system never emphasized creating turnovers in Phoenix.

The most inexcusable lapse for this team is defensive rebounding. 29th in the league is simply unacceptable. Especially when there are players that can rebound on the roster. All of the small forward's rebounding numbers are down as well. Is Vinny having them leak out or are they all under performing?

I'm completely sick of small ball. Sick of seeing Gray out there with Nocioni or Gooden at PF. Sick of seeing the players that can force turnovers, challenge shots, and rebound on the bench.

Rotation Rules for Vinny

Scotter — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 20:30:52 -0000

It's becoming clear that Vinny needs a little help figuring out lineups and rotations. This preseason has worn away a lot of the hope I had for Vinny's coaching. At least he didn't actually start Gray and bench Tyrus, but Vinny has left the impression that he might succomb to any stupid idea after this preseason. Starting Thabo is probably the smallest crime he could have committed so I'm trying to look at that positively. If starting Thabo is what Vinny is going to do then this is what he needs to do.

Backcourt

*If Thabo starts, Gordon replaces him before the 6 minute mark in the 1st quarter.

*Hinrich comes in for Rose, and he can play with Gordon, while Rose rests. Rose comes in for Gordon, and Hinrich moves to SG. Then Gordon comes back in for Hinrich to close the half.

If Thabo's spot in the starting lineup only amounts to 10-12 minutes in the backcourt, it's okay and actually makes the rest of the rotations easier. Gordon still gets his 32 minutes at SG. Hinrich hopefully comes in aggressive off the bench, which is when he's at his best. Hopefully he's effective enough to keep Rose from wearing out, and he can get 4-8 minutes in at SG. If Thabo is going to start this makes the best use of the four guys.

Frontcourt

*Deng plays 36+ minutes at SF, Thabo backs him up. Nocioni's days of playing SF are over unless there is actually someone Nocioni can guard on the floor at SF.

*Thomas starts at plays every minute his foul situation allows. It's time for the team to play its best and most talented big man.

*Noah can come off the bench, but he should be playing every minute his foul situation allows as well.

*Gooden can start at C if the matchup is okay. And he competes with Nocioni for minutes behind Thomas.

*Nocioni only plays backup minutes at PF, except for very specfic matchups at SF.

*Aaron Gray only plays meaningful minutes when Tyrus is on the floor with him. No Noah, and especially not Gooden or Nocioni.

The team really only needs a true center that could play 15-20 minutes per game to make the frontcourt rotations work. Thabo backs up Deng, Nocioni backus up Thomas, and Noah backups the new guy, but plays the bulk of the minutes at C. Vinny doesn't have to mix or match, it's simple 1 for 1 substitution. Gooden is the easiet piece to move, and I think Paxson should be trying to move him for a Rasho Nesterovic or similar player as soon as possible. Gooden isn't that big an upgrade over Nocioni as a backup 4, and his ineptitude defensively at center is a problem. And the team shouldn't be wasting shots or possessions on Gooden in his contract year. And I'd just as soon not leave the temptation around for Vinny to bench Thomas.

I think the team can work like that, and wins games. The talent is there, but it needs to be used properly. There are only a couple fo ways to make this collection of players work, and dozens of ways to turn this into a Jim Boylan like mess. So far it's feels like Vinny is headed toward creating a mess with either Larry Hughes, Aaron Gray, Drew Gooden, or Thabo. I hope to be pleasantly surprised tonight, but this preseason has worn much of the goodwill Vinny had coming in.

Some thoughts on Noah

Scotter — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 20:15:48 -0000

I haven't written much about Noah, and part of the reason for that is I don't feel like I have a good handle on what he'll become. Part of the problem is that there's no one to compare him to. He's basically a freak as a player. Guys built like Noah don't handle the ball the way he does, and they usually are more natural shotblockers than Noah. Noah actually had a very similar rookie season to that of his college teammate All Horford. They had the same TS% to go along with similar TO%s, USG%s, and PERs. Which shouldn't be surprising considering how similar their college stats were. But, it's so much easier to envision what Horford will become because he's a much more conventional player. If I had to compare Noah to any player right now, that player would probably be Ben Wallace. The other part of the problem is that his performance in some key areas varied dramatically during his rookie season. I'm not sure, which is the real Noah, yet.

Noah's season can be pretty easily divided into three time periods. Two months where he was he played limited minutes. Two months where he mostly came off the bench playing about 20 minutes per game, and two months where he started.

Per 32 Min	G	GS	MPG	FG	FGA	FT	FTA	ORB	DRB	AST	STL	BLK	TOV	PF	PTS	FG%	FT%	TS%
Nov/Dec	23	0	12.2	3.5	8.4	3.6	4.7	4.1	3.9	1.9	1.9	1.7	1.8	4.6	10.7	41.9	78.0	51.1
Jan/Feb	27	8	20.9	3.6	7.6	2.0	3.7	3.6	5.9	2.0	1.2	0.9	2.0	3.5	9.3	47.8	53.8	50.1
Mar/Apr	24	23	28.7	3.8	7.4	3.1	4.1	3.5	4.8	1.5	1.4	1.5	1.7	3.3	10.7	51.6	76.1	58.4
Season	74	31	20.7	3.7	7.7	2.8	4.0	3.6	5.1	1.8	1.4	1.3	1.9	3.6	10.2	48.2	69.1	53.9

There were definitely many positive signs in Noah's rookie season to go along with the question marks. He led the team in adjusted +/- at plus 5.6 points. The team was 4 points better on defense with Noah on the floor. And his offensive rebounding helped to at least keep his offensive impact neutral. It was a solid rookie season, but I'm not sure if it suggests greater things to come or merely more of the same.

I mentioned Ben Wallace before. Noah wasn't similar to a 22 or 23 year old Ben Wallace. He was similar to the Ben Wallace that played for the Bulls last year. In all of the categories where Ben Wallace was supposed to be a difference maker, Noah put up similar numbers. Their ORB%, DRB%, TRB%, AST%, STL%, and BLK% were all separated by 0.7% or less. Which was indication of both how active Noah was on the offensive glass and defense and how far Wallace had fallen as a defensive rebounder. If Wallace was simplay capable of being the offensive player that Noah was as a rookie, we might be thinking differently about Wallace now.

The positives are there. Noah demonstrated the ability to be a top ten offensive rebounder in the NBA. He steals the ball at an elite rate for big men. He's wasn't a particuarly great shot blocker, but he was a notch above average. He's never shown me that he's a natural shot blocker, but maybe he can improve on his skills in this area. Given his size and athleticism, he should be better than his rookie numbers. What I'll be looking for the most from Noah this season is improved defensive rebounding. Noah's 18% DRB% isn't in LaMarcus Aldridge territory, but it's a long way from where it needs to be. Noah was 56th in DRB% among players that played 1000 minutes, and there's a bunch of guys ahead of him that Noah needs to be out rebounding. I'm looking for him to at least grab 20% of defensive boards this season, and I'd really like to see him eventually get to at least 25%. I'm not completely convinced that he can get there though. It's something I'm going to be monitoring as the season goes along, and something that needs to happen if the Bulls are going to be a great defensive team again. Wallace was still grabbing over 21% in 06/07, and Chandler and even higher numbers. It's a key area that will determine how good Noah can be.

There were positive signs on offense as well. The biggest was that Noah appeared to learn how to finish in the NBA as the year progressed. His FG% rose throughout the season, getting over 50% the last two months. I'd like to see continued improvement. His goal should be at least 53% given the shots he takes. The 2nd biggest was that he got to the FT line, shooting better than 1 FTA for every 2 FGA. Curiously he shot a remarkable 78% from the line the 1st two months. Then he fell apart and shot 54% over the next two months before raising his FT% again over the last two months. I'm not sure what was responsible for the drop off, but he at least showed the potential and ability to shoot at least 75% from the line even with the terrible shooting form. He doesn't have to make a single jumpshot if he can shoot 75% from the line, considering the rate at which he gets to the FT line. There's clearly the potential for Noah to be an effective offensive player within his limited opportunites. He mangaged a 58% TS% over the last two months of the season when he was finishing better and hitting his FTAs. The area to monitor this season is obviously turnovers, but it's an area that most 2nd year players improve at least a little. But if Noah wants to handle the ball and take advantage of his passing ability, his turnovers have to come down significantly, not just a little. .

Ideally Noah moves from being a chaotic defensive factor to becoming a true defensive force. That requires significantly improved defensive rebounding, and it hopefully involves Noah developing into a better on the ball defender that could allow Tyrus the freedom to be a weak side shot blocker. Offensively, Noah is already acceptable. He either needs to give up the ball and try to become a high efficiency/low usage player in the Chandler/Biedrins or significantly improve his decison making on offense. I'd be content with the former, but I'm sure he'll at least try to do the latter given his skills and love of handling the ball. But, I'm also not sure he's truly capable of doing either. I'm not sure he's athletic enough to do what Chandler and Biedrins do, and I'm not sure his offensive I.Q. can reach the necessary level. Noah is something of a mystery to me right now. There should be the potential there to be a really good defender and offensive role player, but that potential also might now really exist due to physical and mental limitations. Whether he develops into something more or not, what he is right now is pretty good. If he can sustain most of what he did in the 2nd half of the season, he's a very solid starting caliber front court player and a solid building block.

Gordon finally signed, let's talk about Deng

Scotter — Thu, 07 Aug 2008 21:22:01 -0000

I intended this to come shortly after Deng signed. But, it sat half finished for a couple of months.

Too often people focus on the wrong aspects of Deng's game, especially Deng's overrated midrange jumper. There is all too much emphasis on changing Deng's game without acknowledging where Deng's value comes from in the first place. Both Deng and the Bulls need to be aware of how Deng's attempts to expand his offensive game impacts the core of his existing game. Adding skills can actually have a detrimental effect on a player's impact if those skills are used improperly. When Rasheed Wallace developed a 3-point shot, he certainly had more potential as an offensive player. And he has certainly used that skill to make some big shots, but has it ultimately made him a more effective basketball player on a consistent basis? For a season or two it did, but since then I would say no. And I have some similar concerns about Deng, and his quest to expand his game. How he and the team employ those new skills will determine whether they make Deng a more effective player.

Offensively Deng's core value has comparatively little to do with the jumpshot that was over hyped by everyone from the stooges broadcasting Bulls games to Hubie Brown during the 06/07 season. Deng is not one of the best midrange jumpshooters in the league and he never was. The reason the Bulls have been 5.2, 2.7, 6.1, and 4.6 points per 100 possessions better on offense with Deng on the court over the last four years is not Deng's jumpshot. The bulk of Deng's offensive value comes from Deng's points in the paint, the 7.7 and 6.7 points per game that Deng has scored in the paint the last two years. In 06/07 when Deng played all 82 games, he scored 26% of the team's points in the paint on 22% of the team's FGAs in the paint. Between cuts to the basket and offensive rebounding Deng scores both frequently and efficiently in the paint, which has set him apart from everyone else on the roster the last two seasons. This is the core value that needs to be protected.

There is always discussion of Deng needing to develop either a post game or a 3-point shot. It would be great if he did either, but I also think there is too little recognition of the potential pitfalls of either scenario. Deng's greatest strength is his cutting ability off the ball, especially from the weak side. Taking Deng away from that role needs to result in something better otherwise the team is taking two steps back to take one forward, which is exactly what I thought happened last year.

The team came into last season committed to playing Deng at SG in the preseason and more importantly committed to posting Deng up. Throughout the preseason Deng was isolated in the post. Deng put up fade away after fade away with mediocre results at best, and this continued through the 1st part of the regular season. The central problem with Deng posting up is that it prevents him from doing what he does best, cutting to the basket from the weak side. Putting Deng in the post, not only focuses the defense on Deng, but removes the team's biggest off the ball threat. That's the two steps back. Deng may be able to reach a point where he can justify posting up by dominating specific matchups, but until he can the team should be hesitant to put him in that position.

So what about Deng taking 3-pointers? I'm simply curious about Deng's 3-point shooting. Deng becoming a consistent 3-point shooter can be done with less detrimental results. I played close attention to the few 3s Deng took last season, and was pleased with the results. His mechanics were good. He wasn't alterng his form to achieve the necessary distance on his shot. There was one shot early in the season that really stood out. With the shot clock running down, he came off a screen on the right wing caught the ball and knocked in a 28 footer while shooting over the screen with his natural mechanics. After last season I'm confident that Deng could shoot a solid % on a modest number of 3-point attempts, maybe 1 or 2 3PA per game. But, 3-point shooting is only a benefit if moving back two feet isn't preventing from getting to the rim.

More important than a post game or a 3-point shot is Deng's actually developing a true midrange game, rather than just a midrange jumpshot. This is where I think the team and Deng should place the most emphasis. The ability for Deng to create his own shot facing up from 18 feet and in when the defense recovers in time to prevent the initial shot is more essential than jump hooks or 3s, and it doesn't get talked about enough. Deng learning to create space to get his shot off with a fake or a dribble is more important than 3-point shooting or posting because it's organic to what he already does well as a player. There's one play from the 07' Miami series that has always stood out to me. With the Bulls needing a bucket Deng dribbled to his left across the FT line to create space and then pulled up and knocked down a jumper over his defender with his momentum still carrying him to his left. That's the type of play I wanted to see from Deng the most last season, a fake, a dribble to create space, and a jumpshot over his defender. This should be Deng's 1st priority. The skills to create a shot.

Don't get me wrong. I want to see Deng improve his entire skill set. I want him to improve his post game, add range on his shot, and improve his mid-range game. Those would all be good things in the abstract, and I hope they happen. But, the Bulls and Deng have to be aware of how they develop and employ those new skills. There has to be awareness that anything that too far removes Deng from his weak side cuts will likely be detrimental to the team.

The Greeks speak my language.

Scotter — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 12:08:49 -0000

An interview with Olympiacos assistant Manos Manouselis on K.C. Johnson's blog caught my eye. What stood out me was the language used by this assistant coach of a Greek team. (emphasis mine)

Tribune: Why Childress?

Manouselis: At the beginning of our free-agent search, we never considered Josh a realistic option because we felt he would sign an NBA contract at the mid-level exemption or slightly above. When we were made aware of the fact that Josh would sincerely consider us as an option we saw his specific skill set at the [small forward/shooting guard] position as a perfect fit to our roster. Josh is an incredibly efficient perimeter player who could spread the floor, penetrate, is a great offensive rebounder, has excellent ballhandling skills for a player of his size and athletically he can play above the rim. Josh also has great character and is an extremely intelligent young man and that intelligence translates to the basketball court. Josh's ability to make an impact on the game without the ball was particularly enticing to us considering we had recently signed two-time Euroleague MVP point guard Theodoros Papaloukas. Papaloukas is a facilitator who needs the ball to be effective so we wanted a [small forward/shooting guard] that would complement his talents rather than create any duplication. I believe Josh will flourish offensively playing with Papaloukas and defensively he will be a lockdown perimeter defender.

This is a great answer and the whole interview is very good. There's a clear understanding of how players interact offensively. He understands the importance of distinguishing between guys who need the ball versus guys that don't, and the need to complement the former with the latter. Understanding this dynamic is critical when it comes to adding and subtracting players to a team. It's something I talk about a lot when discussing players and personnel changes. The Spurs understand it very well, and their front office graduates Slap Pritch and Presti appear to understand it as well. Bryan Colangelo appears to understand it. And I'm sure I'm missing more. It's one thing Jerry Krause did seem to understand. But, it's also something that many GMs appear to have no clue about. It's something Paxson should understand given the teams he played on, but I can't think of any firm evidence that he does so far.

There's also the recognition of the importance of efficiency and that qualities like intelligence have to translate to the basketball court. There's also the recognition that Deng can't play SG later in the interview. And notice there isn't a single mention of hustle, grit, calming influence, resonating with the fan base, or any number of cliches from the Bulls that I've tried to remove from my memory. It's instead a clear articulation of the things Childress does well on the basketball court and how he fits into the team structure. This is what I want from my team's GM and coach. This is language I understand and language that would tell me that Paxson and the coaches actually have a clue about how to construct a team, rather than just some predeceived notions. I'm not a Paxson basher, partly because I'm willing to believe the reports of Uncle Jerry helping out with some of Paxson's biggest blunders. But, I'd be a lot more confident if I knew Paxson and Vinny understood basketball in this way.

Bulls Beat Summer League Podcast is out

Scotter — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 16:22:17 -0000

Bulls Beat Summer League Podcast is out

Tyrus Thomas, Shawn Kemp, and the Future

Scotter — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 03:07:19 -0000

After the 2006/2007 season, I sat down with the Basketball-Reference player season finder to look for players that had similar rookie seasons to Tyrus Thomas in order to understand how he might develop. Only one other player of any age had such an extreme rookie season in terms of both good things like blocks, steals, rebounds, freethrow attempts, and bad things like turnovers and personnel fouls with at least 800 minutes played. That other player was Shawn Kemp. Kemp was also the most similar player to Tyrus according to John Hollinger's similarity score system, he'd have to be given how rare their combination of statistics and attributes were. That they both entered the league as raw super athletic 20 year old PFs made the comparison only more intriguing. I discussed this similarity a year ago in a review of Tyrus's rookie season, and thought it was time to reflect on Tyrus's season and check back in with the Kemp comparison. I had hoped to see Tyrus get something close to the 30 minutes per game and 66 starts that Kemp received in his 2nd season. Seattle made the decision to trade Xavier McDaniel 15 games into Kemp's 2nd season to open up playing time for him. The Bulls management failed to make a similar decision. I was against the Joe Smith signing simply because it was an easy excuse for Skiles to not play Tyrus, and unfortunately my fears were realized and and Tyrus only received 27 starts and played 1100 fewer minutes than Kemp did in his 2nd season.

Kemp and Thomas

I still think Thomas is capable of having a similar impact to Kemp. They're similar players, not exact copies of each other. And it's probably important to highlight the differences now, especially for the sake of Tyrus doubters. As this biography piece with some great links details, Shawn Kemp was a McDonald's All-American and was recruited by the power house schools including home state Indiana. Kemp had his big growth spurt during his 1st three years of HS and was done growing after his junior year, and played the post in HS. Kemp accepted a scholarship to Kentucky, but failed to score high enough on his SATs to play as a freshman. At Kentucky he was put on probation for pawning necklaces belong to Sean Sutton a teammate and coach Eddie Sutton's son. According to Kemp he pawned them as a favor for a fellow teammate, but refused to finger that player since he was leaving school anyway. After transferring to a community college, Kemp declared for the NBA without playing any college ball. The story was different for Tyrus according to Draft Express.

In high school, Thomas was only 5-11 as a freshman. He only played organized basketball in his junior and senior years and never really built up enough recruiting hype to be considered a top 100 prospect. As a junior he was a mere 6-6 and 190 pounds, and when he officially committed to LSU they did not initially even have a scholarship for him. One later opened up when a JUCO recruit was kicked off his team and his scholarship offer was rescinded. Thomas grew to 6-7 ½, 200 pounds as a high school senior, and averaged 16 points, 12 rebounds and six blocks per game, good enough only for the all-second team in Louisiana. He was forced to redshirt his freshman year at LSU after injuring his neck, and grew to 6-9, 215 pounds over that year.

Tyrus was clearly more of a late bloomer than Kemp. Kemp was 6'8.75" barefoot when he was drafted and Tyrus was 6'7.25", although it seems likely that Tyrus has made up some of that gap.

But, I obviously don't expect Tyrus to become a 256 lb. PF/C like Kemp. I don't expect Tyrus to ever play with the power that Kemp did. Statistically, I don't expect Tyrus to score as much as Kemp did or as efficiently. Tyrus won't be the offensive rebounding force that Kemp was. I do believe that Tyrus has a chance to make up for some of that the offensive gap on the defensive end. Tyrus has more natural defensive instincts, superior timing as a shot blocker, and a better feel for playing the passing lanes. He's also a better passer offensively. I believe in the end Tyrus has a chance to have a similar overall impact to Kemp, but the bigger point that I'm making is that Tyrus will likely continue to develop similarly to Kemp. Kemp provides an entry point for discussing Tyrus present and future.

I was drawn to this comparison because of statistics. But, it became clear after doing research that the similarities extend beyond the statistics and their games to their personalities both on and off the court. On the court there is the emotional demonstrative style of play. Sam Smith has often compared Tyrus to Kemp. And a lot of what Sam wrote and said about Tyrus shows up in Kemp as well. Players that didn't trust easily, that didn't interact well with the media, and that seemed to have a sense of entitlement to go with some clear immaturity, but also someone that teammates would defend. A player that interacts incredibly well with children.

Starting with his Seattle Sonics tenure in 1989, Shawn dressed like Santa and gave out food and toys to children of the poor. Crowds of adoring kids came out to see Santa Kemp; he returned their affection with a priceless gift. Shawn took these kids seriously; he helped them, he joked with them, he even played ball with them.

As I read quotes from a young Kemp, it struck me how easily I could envision Tyrus saying similar things. And the descriptions of behavior fit as well. There's clearly a similarity in personality as well as ability.

Comparing Their Games

There are some similarities in there games as well. Probably the biggest similarity is that they both want to grab the rebound and dribble up the court themselves and make something happen with the ball. When I put in game tape of the 96' finals to refresh my memories of Kemp for this post, I was surprised how many times Kemp would grab the rebound and push the ball himself. And just like Tyrus, he would always want to dribble at least once before passing the ball to a guard after a rebound. Any of the Kemp highlight clips will show him taking the ball coast to coast. Both have been effective doing it even though it drives coaches and Johnny Red crazy because it always has the potential to end ugly. They share a fondness for spin moves. Kemp also had a Tyrus like tendency to not run the floor hard and would be the last one up the court on offense. Kemp like Tyrus so far always struggled with mistakes, especially turnovers and fouls. The fouls prevented him from ever playing 34+ minutes per game in his prime. Kemp didn't need a lot of moves to be effective. He didn't do much with his left hand inside. He pretty much would turn over his left shoulder and jump over his defender in the post and shoot with his right hand or dunk it if he could. And he would face up around the FT line and either take the open jumper, pull up of the dribble for a very short jumper, or get all the way to the basket or to the FT line. Tyrus has shown potential with his jumpshot and right handed jump hook. He has the ability to master those simple things enough to eventually average an efficient 15-17 points per game. He could average 15 points on just his current shot attempts if he had a 50% FG and played 35 min/g.

The Statistical Comparison

If you look at their rookie seasons, you can see the unique similarities and the key differences statistically. The same defensive rebound rate and the same extremely high foul rate. Both had high rates of steal and blocks with Tyrus out performing Kemp in those areas. And then Kemp slightly out performing Tyrus all offensive areas, in TS%, in offensive rebound rate, and in turnover rate with a slightly higher usage rate. Given there similarities, I thought it was likely that Tyrus would improve in the same ways that Kemp did in his 2nd season. When I began to do my research, I expected that Tyrus's lack of playing time and poor FG% had killed the comparison between the players. However when I looked at their 2nd seasons, I found that their rate statistics changed from year one to year two similarly in nearly every category.

Player	Age	MP	PER	TS%	eFG%	ORB%	DRB%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	Usg%	ORtg	DRtg	PF
Shawn Kemp	20	1120	15.9	53.1	0.481	14.7	21.8	18.1	3.4	2.1	4.0	17.8	22.4	103	105	6.6
Tyrus Thomas	20	966	14.8	52.1	0.475	10.6	21.1	15.9	6.6	2.4	6.2	20.8	20.9	95	93	6
Player	Age	MP	PER	TS%	eFG%	ORB%	DRB%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	Usg%	ORtg	DRtg	PF
Shawn Kemp	21	2442	17.6	55.1	0.509	12.9	20.5	16.6	8.5	1.6	3.3	15.5	22.4	109	106	4.7
Tyrus Thomas	21	1330	14.6	48.6	0.424	8.4	21.1	14.5	11.0	1.9	4.2	13.0	19.7	101	103	4.6

Look at the similar changes across the board. Their ORB% rates both declined by about 2%. Their DRB% both stayed about the same. Their AST% both went up about 5%. Their STL% and BLK% both declined. Their TO% rates declined with a huge decline for Tyrus, which is probably an indication that Tyrus was too passive offensively last season. And their USG% stayed about the same with both producing six more points per 100 possessions than they did the year before even with Tyrus's decline in FG%. And finally their PF/36 min decreased significantly. That's similar changes in nearly every category, except for FG%. So the similarity between the two players held together pretty well. Now that Kemp's 1st NBA coach, Bernie Bickerstaff, has joined the Bulls coaching staff, I'd be interested in his thoughts on this comparison.

Now let's address the elephant in the room, Tyrus's FG% last season. Tyrus FG% decline wasn't quite the disaster that it looks like. Almost all of Tyrus's decline in FG% is due to decreased dunk opportunities. He had 82 dunks as a rookie and only 58 last season, while playing more than an additional 350 minutes. Dunks made up 29% of his FGA as a rookie, but only 14% of his FGA last season. A decline in dunk% should have been expected, but not one of this magnitude. For one thing the lobs to Thomas for easy dunks pretty much disappeared last season. In a decent offense around 20% of Tyrus's FGA should be dunks. I should also note that Kemp was playing on a team with a top ten offense. His FG% on non-dunk inside shots didn't improve from 33%, but he took fewer assisted shots (58% to 44%). That implies that in order for him to maintain the same FG%, he had to improve his skills some. The average FG% on assisted close shots has been found to be 12% higher than unassisted close shots, this would be especially true in Tyrus's case. And he did improve very specific skills. His right handed jump hook from the right block was particularly consistent, probably because it was his one move post move in college. He made shots around the basket that he wouldn't of made as a rookie. But, obviously his biggest improvement was as a jump shooter. As has been said before, he went from making 20% of his jump shots to making 35% of his jump shots. I think the hotzones charts show this even better. Rookie year and 2nd year. He was particularly consistent all year from the 3 zones at the top of the key where he shot 43%, the same % as Joe Smith last season. So his significant drop in FG% wasn't a failure to improve. If the % of his FGA that were dunk attempts fell from 29% to just 22%, instead of 14% then Tyrus would have had a similar FG% to his rookie season, despite taking 40% more jump shots. If the team is better offensively as expected and his FG% doesn't return to at least close to his rookie year 47.5% next season then I'll start to be be worried.

This is a big year for Thomas, especially if the team finally commits to letting him play through some mistakes and gives him a consistent 26+ min/g. Many NBA players really improve in their 3rd year. Despite the clear flaws in his game, Thomas has still managed to be an effective player as is. He managed to post consecutive 14 PERs, despite his TOs as a rookie and his FG% as a 2nd year player. He had the 2nd best adjusted and unadjusted plus minus on the team. He had the 3rd best Roland rating last season, and was 4th as a rookie. On offense with Tyrus on the court has been just as good as when he's off the court, and the team has been significantly better on defense in both of Tyrus's seasons with him on the court. It may not be pretty, but he gets the job done right now as is. Consider what he can do offensively as his shot improves, he develops consistency with his post moves, and he's actually put in positions to succeed offensively.

If we stay with Kemp as a developmental model then there are few things to look for. Some of the key trends in Kemp's development were rises in ORB%, STL%, and BLK% from the 2nd to the 3rd year. A slight increase in USG% and a big jump in DRB%, which is probably an indicator of gaining strength and bulk. With TO% and the fouling rate holding steady. Kemp also broke the 20 PER barrier. Given the limited minutes he played last season I'm not incredibly confident that we'll see the same improvements in Tyrus's statistics next season and at this point I'll believe Tyrus is going to get consistent minutes when I finally see it, but I wouldn't be surprised to see significant improvement. And if it happens it's likely to be in the same areas as Kemp, along with at least a restoration of Tyrus's FG%.

Josh Smith Enters the Picture

After Tyrus's 2nd season it's worth talking about a 2nd comparison. Tyrus often gets compared to Josh Smith because of their very similar size and athletic ability. That comparison didn't make much sense based on Tyrus's rookie season. Tyrus was a much better rebounder, and had a much higher rate of steals, turnovers, and fouls. After Tyrus's 2nd season, Smith at least enters the picture. Here's Josh Smith's statistics.

Season	Age	MP	PER	TS%	eFG%	ORB%	DRB%	TRB%	AST%	STL%	BLK%	TOV%	Usg%	ORtg	DRtg	PF
2004-05	19	2050	15.4	50.6	45.8	7.9	18.6	13.0	10.2	1.5	5.4	16.0	18.4	100	107	2.8
2005-06	20	2559	15.5	50.0	44.7	8.0	17.2	12.5	12.2	1.3	6.2	15.2	18.9	103	108	3.7
2006-07	21	2647	18.3	50.6	45.8	7.4	21.0	14.1	16.3	2.0	6.1	16.3	24.1	99	102	3.3
2007-08	22	2873	19.0	52.0	46.8	6.6	20.4	13.5	16.6	2.3	5.9	15.5	25.0	102	103	3.4

The obvious similarities are steal and block rates matched by very few players and a poor FG% for a player getting half his shots in the paint. Smith looked more similar to Tyrus once I took into account that Smith didn't play significant minutes at PF until his 3rd year when he was 21. That changes how Smith's statistics for his first two seasons should be looked at in comparison to Tyrus's. If Smith was playing PF from the start it's possible his defensive rebound rate would have been around 20% like Tyrus. His STL% also would likely have been at least closer to 2% from the start. The key differences are a steady turnover rate for Smith and a lack of foul trouble that separates Tyrus and Kemp from Smith along with better offensive rebounding.

Tyrus's Future

I have come to see Tyrus's likely future as something between Smith and Kemp offensively. He's not going to be the perimeter player Smith is offensively or the post player that Kemp was. This is another example where I'm glad Tyrus is a player that didn't come into the league shooting jump shots. That would have led him down the Josh Smith path of launching 3s at a 25% clip. Tyrus's passing role should be closer to Smith's AST% somewhere between 14-18%. He really is good at making the post entry pass and finding players for easy baskets. He's a better offensive rebounder than Smith, but he'll never approach Kemp. Defensively he's closer to Smith as a shot blocker, but more like Kemp in terms of being able to defend his man in the post and stopping penetration in help defense, which is part of the reason for the higher foul rate for Thomas and Kemp. I think most people would be satisfied if Tyrus turned out to be something between Josh Smith and Shawn Kemp. Obviously the closer he gets to Kemp in terms of impact the better, and this next season should be telling. Smith has barely improved as a player over four seasons. He still only shot 29% on 2P jump shots last season. His TO% and his shot selection haven't improved either. Next season we should have a better idea of which path Thomas is following, but for right now it looks more like Kemp's.

Vinny has talked about putting players in a position to succeed. For Tyrus that means being kept close to the basket on defensive the majority of the time. Despite all the defensive mistakes, the defense has been objectively better with Tyrus on the floor. 4.0 and 3.7 points per 100 possessions better with him on the floor in his two seasons. On offense he needs to be involved in the play, either by playing in the pick and roll with Rose or with the ball in his hands creating on his own. Tyrus is never going to be great off the ball on offense. That means taking the risk of letting him create on offense. Getting him the ball on the right block or isolated at the left elbow when he has a mismatch. It means giving him the freedom to pull down a rebound and push the ball up the floor himself occasionally. And if the other players actually run the floor with him then more good than bad will happen. Eventually running some pick and rolls with Tyrus handling the ball with Deng as the screener. I watched Seattle runnng pick and rolls with Kemp handling and Schrempf as the screener in the 96' Finals. And if you've watched summer league last summer, you should have seen some of this from Tyrus in his three games. There's actually no other player on the roster that I'd rather isolate inside of 15 feet. I know he'll drive people crazy that are more focused on the mistakes than the good he can create with the ball. What's the good? 1st, Tyrus gets to the FT line on a team that doesn't and he shoots a sold FT% now. 2nd, Tyrus is the kind of passer that gets other players easy baskets inside. Over 50% of his assists were on inside shots by far the highest% on the team as well as the highest % of assists that resulted in dunks. It's a statistic that for the most part separates the guys making the routine pass for a jump shot like Kirk Hinrich from the guys who are drawing help defenders and making plays with their passing. Aaron Gray owes a lot of his best offensive performances to Tyrus getting him the ball.

I'm not suggesting that giving Tyrus the ball should be an every time down the court thing, but it should be part of the mix. With opportunities, I'm confident Tyrus will eventually improve as a finisher as he improves his skill level and more importantly understands what he can and can't do. And knowing that he'll get the ball back if he passes out of the post would help too. I don't expect everyone to share my optimism when it comes to Tyrus. But, know that my optimism comes from watching him as closely as any fan and taking a very extensive look at the numbers. If the new Bulls coaching staff actually trust and put faith in Tyrus in this way, I believe both they and the Bulls coaching staff will be rewarded.

(EDIT: I thought it might be helpful to post Hollnger's projections for Tyrus's 07/08 season to give you a better of the degree to which Tyrus was expected to improve)

SEASON	FG%	FT%	P/40	R/40	A/40	TS%	Ast	TO	Usg	Reb	PER
2006-07	.475	.606	15.5	11.1	1.7	52.1	8.1	19.1	18.9	15.9	14.80
2007-08	.423	.741	15.1	10.3	2.7	48.6	13.2	11.3	18.6	14.5	14.69
2007-08 (projected)	.482	.598	16.5	10.4	2.3	52.21	10.79	18.06	20.44	15.19	15.57

Tyrus's new site has some interesting comments in his blog.

Scotter — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 20:27:04 -0000

Tyrus's new site has some interesting comments in his blog.

There is entry describing last season and his relationship with the veterans and one giving in his thoughts on this summer and the future.

hat tip to Real Gm

Thinking about the Future and the 90s Sonics

Scotter — Sat, 28 Jun 2008 15:35:54 -0000

[From the FanPosts. A very fun and interesting read. -ed.]

The events of the last few weeks has me thinking about the Seattle Supersonics of the 1990's. They had the #2 overall pick in the 1990 draft, which they used to select Gary Payton after Derrick Coleman went 1st overall. Payton joined a team that had just missed the playoffs with 41 wins after losing in the 2nd round the year before. He also joined a team with a collection of good players, but no stars, and a raw 2nd year athletic PF in Shawn Kemp. The Sonics made the playoffs in Payton's 1st season, the 2nd round in his 2nd seasons, and all the way to game 7 of the Western Conference finals in his 3rd season. That 3rd season was the beginning of a six year run where the Sonics won at least 55 games, averaging 59.5 wins. They finished in the top ten in both offensive and defensive efficiency every season. According to Basketball-Reference's rating system, the Sonics never finished with worse than the league's 3rd best regular season during the six year run. These Sonics had some famous playoff failures, most notably losing to the 8th seed Nuggets in 1994 only eclipsed by the Mavericks exiting the 1st round at the hand of the Warriors. Still the Sonics were good enough to compete for a championship and with different fortune could have won one. And there's some similarities to what the Bulls are now trying to accomplish.

Gary Payton is a different player than Derrick Rose, but there are some similarities in terms of being a PG with physical advantages, but not a developed jumpshot. But, the bigger similarity is that the Bulls are asking Rose to do what Payton did. To join a team with established playoff level talent as a somewhat raw top 2 overall draft pick and become not only the best player on the team, but also the team leader. It took Payton time. He didn't average double digit points per game until his third season. He only had a PER of 13 in his 1st two years. And only averaged 13.5 points and 4.9 assists when the Sonics went to the Western Conference Finals in his third year. It wasn't until his fifth season that Payton established himself as both the best player on the team and the team leader. I don't think it will take Rose that long, but if he struggles Payton is an example to keep in mind. Seattle also did the right thing by starting him the entire time and playing him close to 30 minutes per game even during those 1st two seasons.

Last summer I wrote about Shawn Kemp having what was really the only similar rookie season to Tyrus Thomas. A comparison that was more interesting because of their similarities as raw 20 year old athletic power forwards. Those similarities were actually still present, despite Tyrus's disappointing 2nd season and Kemp's solid 15 and 8 2nd season. But, that's it's own fanpost. Let me summarize by saying that a Shawn Kemp like impact is still possible for Tyrus. And I see the Bulls future success tied to Rose and Thomas in the same way that Seattle's was tied to Payton and Kemp.

In addition Deng is actually a pretty similar player to Detlef Schrempf in terms of never being an effective #1 offensive option or efficiently averaging 20+ points per game. But, Deng like Schrempf can be a very efficient 3rd option averaging close to 20 points per game. Schrempf shot a very good 3 point %, but never took many 3 point shots. It's that type of role where's he's the third best player on the team that's perfect for Deng.

I also find it interesting what Seattle did with with the SG position. While Payton and Kemp were getting up to speed, Seattle relied on a one dimensional scorer in Ricky Pierce to be the team's leading scorer. In the 2nd half of Seattle's run, Seattle used a former 20 point per game scorer and undersized SG in Hersey Hawkins as a very efficient fourth option. If you're primarily a shooter, it's easier to make that transition from 1st option to 3rd or 4th option like Ray Allen did last season. If Gordon is re-signed then I'd anticipate that type of evolution in role. If the team is winning, while Gordon's role decreases I think he'll be fine. And if not then he's a much easier to replace when the team needs less scoring from that position a few years from now. If I'm Paxson, I think hard about paying Gordon more to get him on a shorter three year contract. The team does need his scoring in the short term.

Seattle's big problem has been the center position ever since my third cousin left for Milwaukee in 1986. In addition to George Karl mixing and matching Sam Perkins with the likes of Benoit Benjamin, Michael Cage, Ervin Johnson, Bill Cartwright, and Jim McIlvaine in their quest for a starting center. If only they had been able to draft Mouhamed Sene a decade earlier. This is where Noah can be difference maker. One of the reasons for Seattle's problems in the playoffs is that despite being a top ten defense, they were a below average defensive rebounding team. In the playoffs where it's harder to force turnovers, defensive rebounding becomes more important. That shouldn't be a problem area for the Bulls as it wasn't over the last few years, finishing in the top ten from 04/05 through 06/07, and nearly everyone in the rotation is at least an average defensive rebounder for their position.

I thought these were interesting similarities. I'm not suggesting Seattle is a blue print to follow, but it's an interesting precedent for what the Bulls are trying to do over the next couple of years. There are some similar dynamics at work. Obviously if there is a 2010 free agent miracle then the complexion of the team will greatly change. But, I think starting lineup of Rose, Gordon, Deng, Thomas, and Noah works. They'll be some obvious differences at the individual level, but the sum of the parts could be something very similar to what the Sonics had in terms of overall impact. Anyway, I thought it was a comparison worth making.

Hollinger's new draft evaluations

Scotter — Fri, 20 Jun 2008 21:17:14 -0000

John Hollinger changed his method of evaluating college big men. His new method projects a19 PER in year 3 of Beasley's NBA career.

The Sure Thing

Michael Beasley, Kansas State, 19.31

Beasley's rating is the highest of any player going back to 2002, and it's the best by a pretty sizable margin. Obviously, this isn't new information -- nobody doubts this guy's talent level.

But he might be even better than people realize. His numbers were superior even to Kevin Durant's from a year ago, and Durant had everyone gaga over his performance as a college freshman.

Somehow Beasley didn't resonate quite as strongly, perhaps because of concerns over his character, but if he keeps his head on straight he's going to be insanely good.