[From the FanPosts. As much as I love stats, I love more when they support my observations. I'm very scared that I don't know what I'm talking about when doing recaps and the like -ed.]

Lots of recent posts about how things feel different recently.  The Bulls have won 6 of 7, but no game has been easy on that stretch, and it's particularly concerning with the playoffs a week away.

There have been some ideas about what the cause is: Noah's health, Boozer's health, Rose/Watson/Gibson/Bogans being banged up, teams finding success using small lineups.  I looked at the basketballvalue lineup data to try to test these, and you download the spreadsheet here.  As a qualifier, because of the sample sizes, this post is meant to try to figure out what happened instead of what's happening, if that makes any sense [ed. note: great line, ha. Much more after the jump].

Continue reading this post »

Bulls fan here.  Hello.

I was checking lineup data on basketballvalue, and I was amazed to see the Pacers' lineup of Collison-Dunleavy-Granger-McRoberts-Hibbert has arguably been the NBA's #1 lineup this season, with a +14.2 net rating per 100 possessions and 440 minutes played.  Would've never guessed.

Couple questions:

(1) How have they been so good?  Are they that good?

(2) The funny thing is, when Rush replaces Dunleavy in that lineup, it suddenly turns into one of the league's worst lineups, at -15.5 per 100 possessions in 227 minutes.  The ORating drops from 113.7 to 100.4, and even more odd, the DRating drops from 99.4 to 116.0.  And all this despite Dunleavy and Rush posting similar per36 numbers.  Any idea what's causing the change?  Sorry if these numbers been posted before.

[From the Fanposts. Really interesting stuff from YaoPau,  a lot of which I think reflects what we've observed. Our offseason goal should be perfecting the science required to meld Korver and Brewer into a single entity. -ed.]

GO BULLS!!  It's finals week at school, and despite that I can't seem to pull away.

The Bulls been awesome all year, and it's nice to check out basketballvalue's lineup splits and see a bunch of green numbers on the Bulls pages for the first time ever.  Anyway, I did this last year and figured I'd check on it again: the Bulls lineup widget.  Download it here.  Instructions on the excel.

Some interesting stuff from the data (which may or may not mean anything, though it's fun to think about) is below.  Keep in mind the Bulls' have a 106.5 ORating and 99.8 DRating (+6.7 net) on the year according to bv's play-by-play data. 

(1) Surrounding Rose and Boozer with floor spacers: Given Rose and Boozer on the court, Bulls offensive and defensive ratings depending on how many of Deng, Watson, Korver are also on the court.

	Min	Orating	Drating	Net
0or1	895	108.7	103.7	5.0
2or3	326	113.3	104.6	8.6

We know Rose and Boozer are elite offensive players, and when Thibs surrounds them with guys that keep defenses honest with their scoring ability (more specifically, their ability to hit 3s with a decent USG%), we see an improvement in offensive rating.  That 113.3 rating with two+ other floor-spacers on the court would rank #1 in the NBA (the 326 minute sample size is kinda small, though not bad).  Nevertheless, it provides some evidence that the Bulls can be elite offensively when they want to be, and the very average 108.7 rating without floor spacing validates fundamentallysound's preseason claim that, despite two elite offensive players, the Bulls would struggle to be more than average offensively.  Good on ya.

(2) The Bulls' shooting guard.  Nobody has qualms about Thibs' handling of the front court, but it seems worth it to look at his backcourt rotation.  Given Rose and Deng on the floor together, here's how the Bulls have fared with either Bogans, Brewer, Korver, or Watson in at shooting guard:

	Min	Orating	Drating	Net
Bogans	973	108.2	103.7	4.5
Brewer	642	106.0	94.0	12.0
Korver	557	113.0	102.0	11.0
Watson	81	112.7	103.5	9.2

Looking at these numbers, it should be surprising that fans were calling for the Bulls to add a shooting guard.  While it would've been nice to have solidified the lineup with a long term piece, it's hard to argue with the production of Brewer's and Korver's lineups, especially with how much flexibility those two players give Thibodeau.  With Rose/Brewer/Deng, the Bulls' DRating and Net Rating would rank #1 in the NBA.  With Rose/Korver/Deng, the Bulls' ORating and Net Rating would rank #1 in the NBA.  Pretty amazing, I think.

And it's not like Brewer and Korver are coming out of nowhere here.  Brewer was an 18.4 PER, stud defender who started for a Jazz playoff team at age 22.  Korver's been a plus-minus star for years.  In 2008 Jazz lineups were +10.5 with Korver, +5.5 without.  In 2009 +4.3 with Korver, +1.2 without.  In 2010 +10.2 with Korver, +3.9 without.  This year Bulls are +7.8 with Korver, +5.9 without.

This isn't to say that playing Bogans has been a bad idea.  It's tough to argue that the Bulls would be better than 44-18 with a different minutes allocation, and Bogans' eating minutes has kept Brewer's energy up and Korver's soon-to-be 30 year old legs fresh.  Come playoff time though, the data suggests Bogans should have his minutes reduced a bit.

(3) Defense, defense, defense.  Ronnie Brewer and Omer Asik provide zero floor spacing, but the thought is they make up for it with defense.  Bulls lineup data depending how many of Brewer/Asik are on the floor:

	Min	Orating	Drating	Net
0	1314	109.6	105.1	4.5
1	1085	104.0	98.9	5.1
2	506	103.8	88.3	15.5

As we'd expect, the ORating plummets when either one touches the court, but holy hell that defense!  506 is a fairly significant sample size (the Bulls' most-used lineup this year has played just 356 minutes), and that 88.3 rating would be the best team DRating in NBA history.  Granted, when they're both on the floor together, they're usually playing second stringers.  Still, though.  88.3!

Here's more on Asik: I looked through bv's player data, and Asik ranks 3rd in the NBA (500+ minute filter) for Player Net Rating, trailing just Kevin Garnett and Shaquille O'Neal.  Pretty remarkable considering four of the top nine players on this list are Celtics, while the next highest Bull is Brewer at 26th.  Just an incredible rookie season so far.  As for Shaq ranking #2, that could explain why Danny Ainge traded Perkins for two average players.  The Celtics' starting lineup with Shaq was +19 net per 100 possessions.

5 years, $76 million officially, according to KC Johnson.  That leaves us with enough room to sign LeBron to the max (and maybe bring over Asik too), and considering the need to make a last ditch effort for LeBron, and the other contracts handed out this offseason, the signing made most of BaB very happy.

But what do the stats say?  How might Boozer impact the Bulls next season, and from then on?  A bunch of bullet points:

BOOZER ON OFFENSE

Scoring

With a career 23.6 USG% and .577 TS%, we know he's an elite scorer.  But how does he score, and what else does he bring offensively?  First, a table of his 82games scoring stats over the years.

(Note:  "J" stands for jumpshots, "In" stands for inside shots.  Att is % of FG attempts that are that shot type.  Astd% is percentage of those field goals made that were assisted.)

I'm surprised by that 74 Astd% inside.  When I think Boozer I think "post-up isolation scorer", but the stats say that's not how he gets his points.  To see how extreme that Astd% number is, here is a list of big men who scored over 8ppg on inside shots this year:

Boozer's Astd% tops the list, putting him even higher than Nene's.  Weird.  Here's what Synergy Sports has to say about his scoring:

Again, an oddly low amount of Isolation attempts.  Most of Boozer's efficient scoring comes from Cuts and Pick and Rolls.  Here's a look at Bosh's numbers for comparison:

Just two completely different scoring styles.  Bosh is the efficient player in the post and in isolation while Boozer is getting points within the flow of the offense.  Here's one more table, this time showing Boozer's post-scoring PPP (points per possession, which I think is just Pts/(FGA + .44*FTA + TOV) compared to other notable big men.

Damn this is becoming a long post. The numbers show Boozer's post scoring last year wasn't impressive.  While his FG% was strong, his inability to draw fouls and his high turnover rate in those situations brought his overall average down.

Passing

Still, the mere reputation of Boozer as a post threat might be what the Bulls need most, as it'll help spread the floor for Rose.  And besides that threat, Boozer brings another skill that might make him elite in the post overall: his passing.

Statistical APM regressions shows a stronger correlation between AST% and team offensive rating than PER and WS suggest, and Boozer's 15.8 AST% last year ranked 3rd in the NBA behind Duncan and Lee among players that average 9+ reb/36.  That's nice to have, especially with how well Rose/Deng/Noah move off the ball.  Boozer and Noah inside will probably mean we'll see the same great interior passing we saw in Miller/Noah lineups the past two years.

Overall

Boozer's 6-year offensive APM (2004-2009) was +1.34
Boozer's 4-year offensive APM (2006-2009) was +3.13
Boozer's statistical APM in 2010 (my regression using 6-year data) was +2.94.

I think it's safe to say we're getting at least a +2 player offensively, and maybe one as good as +3.  In a list of the top bigs by 2010 statistical APM:

Boozer stacks up as expected.  (Note: Amare is at 1.89, Brook Lopez 1.25).

BOOZER ON DEFENSE

Defensive ability is hard to gauge, but here's everything I could dig up.

Defensive Tools

Using draftexpress measurements to compare Boozer to similarly-sized PFs:

(Note: I used height w/o shoes + 1" since shoe thickness was all over the map with these guys.)  The consensus here seems to be that Boozer is a bit undersized and lacks the tools to be a good defender, but he stacks up fairly well to some other players who are either viewed as having good size or have a good reputation on defense.

I usually trust DraftExpress' scouting reports, and here's what they say about Boozer's defense:

A solid, but unspectacular defensive player. Has the strength to hold position on the block, but lacks the length and quickness to contest shots and effectively defend the high post. Is prone to stay on his feet defensively, a sign of good fundamentals, but also a characteristic that makes the fact he is a bit undersized that much more pronounced.

Offers little as a shot blocker, but does a great job grabbing loose balls in the paint. Has great hands, strength, and anticipation making him one of the League’s best rebounders on the defensive end. Boxes his man out every play and can rebound a pretty big area. Will close out hard when he has to recover to the ball, and while he gets beat of the dribble sometimes, he won’t take himself out of the play very often. A decent option defensively because of his ability to rebound the ball and not take risks, but limited by his quickness and size.

A couple things worth noting here:

• Despite being a rock-solid 258lbs with a good wingspan and reach, maybe the combination of lacking quickness and jumping ability is too damning a disadvantage for a 6'9" PF.
• Boozer is more awesome at defensive rebounding than I thought.  His 26.9 DREB% career ranks 3rd among active players and 6th all-time.  With Deng/Boozer/Noah inside now, we've gone from a 2009 team that couldn't keep the Celtics off the glass to an 2011 team that should be among the best in the league in that category.
• Boozer sounds like a decent post defender, but mediocre at help defense because of a lack of quickness and shotblocking ability.  Because of that, Utah might have been an awful fit for him defensively, with a plodding SF/C combo in Kirilenko and Okur.  Surrounded by a great help defender in Noah, and a SF in Deng who's pretty good at keeping players in front of him, Boozer may be able to just stick to what he does best.

Overall, Boozer's 6 year (2004-2009) defensive APM stood at -1.80, with a 4 year APM (2006-2009) at -2.02.  (2008-2010 APM numbers coming when I increase my dying RAM supply!!).  Those numbers aren't pretty, but with his okay tools and great defensive rebounding numbers, I wouldn't be surprised if he starts rating a bit better than that with the improved Chicago fit.

BOOZER'S VALUE

APM

Here's his total APM numbers from three low-noise sources and a high-noise 09-10 source:

04-08 5-year (weighted toward 2008): +1.97 on offense, -1.95 on defense, +0.02 overall
04-09 6-year unweighted: +1.34 on offense, -1.80 on defense, -0.46 overall (Boozer had a crappy 2009)
06-09 4-year unweighted: +3.13 on offense, -2.02 on defense, +1.11 overall.
09-10 2-year (basketballvalue.com): -1.75 overall.
08-09 2-year (basketballvalue.com): +0.34 overall.

Another indicator of value is looking at 82games net plusminuses over time:

2010: -2.2
2009: -5.9
2008: +1.1
2007: +0.6
2006: -0.5
2005: +2.8
2004: +9.4
2003: -3.1

Each 82games number by itself doesn't mean much, but when a big name player hasn't had a good Net plusminus season in five years that might be telling.  Add in the much more accurate APM numbers, and it looks like Carlos Boozer has been an average NBA player on the Jazz.

That of course could change a bit now that he's a Bull (APM can't adjust for defensive fit), and it's conceivable that he could be a +1, maybe even a +2 player immediately.  But I don't see anything there to say he's worth $15 mil when healthy.

Health

I like using Minutes Per Team Game (MPTG) to put into perspective how much floor time a player is actually giving his team.  The formula is simple, just minutes played per year divided by 82.  MPTG per year for Boozer:

Boozer's been fairly healthy the past four years, with just one stretch of significant time missed.  But at 25.4mptg played over his career, he's been off court nearly half the time.  Just for perspective, Chris Bosh has averaged 32.8mptg over his career, meaning Bosh has given 130% of Boozer's value from minutes played alone, and it's not like Bosh has been that healthy.

tsn.ca is my go-to site for player injuries.  Their list for Boozer includes injuries to his right ankle, left knee, left knee again, right ankle again, hamstring, quad, right foot, calf, and right ankle a third time.  And that was when Boozer was 21-28 years old.

Projecting forward, it's not pretty.  Here's a list of big men who missed about as many games as Boozer has by age 28.  Of them, only Shaq (28.6mptg), Webber (25.7mptg), and Cartwright (25.4mtpg) averaged as many minutes from age 29-33 as Boozer did from age 21-28, and Webber and Cartwright's numbers went way, way down after age 30.  Others like Cliff Robinson (not uncle Cliffy, the other one), Brad Daugherty, Jeff Ruland, Charles Smith were out of the league by age 31.

Obviously using comparables in basketball is inexact, and maybe Boozer holds up like Shaq did.  And if by some chance Boozer's injuries are a thing of the past, there are many star post players who've been effective through age 33.  But because of the way Boozer has missed time (lots of little injuries to his lower body), and considering Shaq was the only player on the comparables list to remain a healthy, impact player through age 31, my guess is there's a really good chance Boozer hits a wall soon.  Even if he doesn't, paying $15 mil/year to a +1/+2 player who will fade as Rose moves into his prime seems like a poor decision.

Here's the insider link, here's the bootlegged link. (can't do that -ed.)

Notable quotes:

[Cleveland's] team power structure supposedly has looked like this: owner Dan Gilbert, GM Danny Ferry and head coach Mike Brown.

With James standing just below Gilbert and just above Ferry.

Two opposing GMs, without citing specific examples, said they know James has vetoed deals Ferry would have made over the past few years.  

Meanwhile, the acquisitions of Larry Hughes, Mo Williams, Shaquille O'Neal and Antawn Jamison all have been made at James' behest, sources say. 

That's why, while sources say it's true that mortgage-broker/friend-to-the-stars William Wesley is shopping James to teams in a package with Kentucky coach John Calipari, for a franchise to actually buy that two-fer would be a blatant attempt to acquire James' value-improving quotient without considering the consequences. One report had Los Angeles Clippers owner Donald Sterling willing to give James that authority, which fits with Sterling's modus operandi.

Anyone believing the Chicago Bulls would promise James he could hire his head coach doesn't know owner Jerry Reinsdorf or the franchise's history during Jordan's era. Jordan, after all, didn't want Jackson to replace Doug Collins as head coach, despised the deal that sent his good friend Charles Oakley to the Knicks for Bill Cartwright and had legendary contempt for GM Jerry Krause.

Six rings later …

"Jerry will never, ever turn the franchise over to a player," said one former Bull. "Ever."

Okay so I basically quoted the whole article.  Not a whole lot of breaking news there, but I hadn't heard that LeBron was vetoing trades, or that Sterling would give LeBron full reign.  And this was the first attempt I've seen at confirming Reinsdorf won't bend for LeBron, and it supports McGraw's story that Calipari isn't on Reinsdorf's wishlist.

As for the constant William Wesley references on ESPN lately, you can read more about him here, or find a colossal amount of info at TrueHoop.  Scoop Jackson calls him the most powerful man in basketball, and MJ's agent David Falk calls him one of the three most powerful.  Worth a read imo.  

I figured - as a diversion from the Bulls' recent run of crap - I'd spread some cheer with a trusty tonic: cherrypicked stats.  In this case, concerning our only three healthy players that actually matter.

Because some might look at this season's PER for Derrick (18.3), Taj (13.5), and JJ (10.7) and think "overrated" or "scrub".  But cherrypick the numbers arbitrarily and convert them to Per36, and, well... hmm.  Maybe it'll help you forget about Jannero Pargo for a second.  Here are the numbers:

(Note: I used a regression to estimate PER.  Standard error is 0.44.)

Derrick Rose Per36 since January 9th (33 games)
22.2pts, 3.8reb, 5.5ast, 0.7stl, 0.2blk, 2.6tov, 1.2pf, .551 TS% -> 20.0 PER

Derrick Rose Per36 since February 3rd (21 games)

22.2pts, 3.6reb, 5.6ast, 0.6stl, 0.2blk, 2.6tov, 1.1pf, .563 TS% -> 20.3 PER

(For some reason I thought Rose really turned it up recently.  Not so.)

Taj Per36 since February 16th (20 games)

12.9pts, 10.8reb, 1.7ast, 0.9stl, 1.7blk, 2.4tov, 4.3pf, .567 TS% -> 15.9 PER

JJ Per36 since February 17th (19 games)

13.7pts, 6.3reb, 2.8ast, 1.2stl, 2.4blk, 2.8tov, 5.7pf, .617 TS% -> 14.9 PER

Mmm that cherry flavor!  JJ still fouls too much, Taj's usage hasn't increased a lick despite the injuries, and Rose has been just a 20 PER guy with mediocre defense -> still not a star yet.  I expected Rose's PER splits to be better.

On the other hand, JJ's passing and scoring efficiency have been awfully nice, as has Taj's rebounding since the first two months.  Considering the general opinion here that Taj and JJ are at least decent defensively, those are strong numbers for rookies over a quarter chunk of the season.  And Rose at a .563 TS% without a 3pt shot (and with just 4.5 FTA) is really impressive for a PG with his usage.

So there.  Mildy happy again?  Big picture, we know Noah and Deng will be solid, and we know Rose will be an all-star fixure.  But Taj and JJ will be around for the next three+ years too.  If nothing else, I'll be watching these last eleven games hoping their recent runs aren't flukes.  Going six deep with a mid-1st rounder and cap space for a max... not all that bad :)

Acquiring a FA through sign-and-trade has been a muddy issue for the 2010 offseason, at least for me.  I've been unsure what we'd have to give up, whether teams without cap space are threats to get involved, and whether cap space gives us a better chance at landing a blue chipper than, say, a Gordon + Tyrus trade package.  Here's all the big contract sign-and-trades that I could find from the past 15 years.  I can't guarantee complete accuracy but I tried checking multiple sources to get the details right:

UNRESTRICTED FAs:

Hedo Turkoglu to the Raptors for a trade exception.  The Raptors had cap space to sign him outright, but the Magic agreed to make it a sign-and-trade for nothing in order to land a trade exception.  

Rashard Lewis to the Magic for a 2nd round pick.  The Magic had the cap space to offer a 5-year max deal with Lewis, but Lewis wanted a 6th year, causing his S&T for a 2nd round pick.

Peja Stojakovic to the Hornets for a trade exception.  The Hornets had plenty of cap space, but the Pacers didn't want to lose Peja for nothing.  So they offered the Hornets $250k to persuade them to acquire Peja via sign-and trade instead, allowing them to get...

Al Harrington to the Pacers for a 1st round pick. The Pacers did not have cap space, but neither did any other option after the Bulls signed Ben Wallace and the Hornets traded for Peja.  The Pacers though had their trade exception, making them "the only Harrington suitor that could complete a sign-and-trade without forcing Atlanta to take back significant salary."  The Hawks were slashing salary after ownership issues, and the Pacers got Harrington for a 1st round pick.

Brad Miller to the Kings for Scott Pollard and a trade exception.  This is the only example I could find of the "use other teams with cap space as leverage" idea posed by tyger and Mike McGraw.  The Nuggets and Jazz had cap space and offered big contracts to Miller, but Miller wanted to join the contending, over the cap Kings, and the Pacers jumped at the trade instead of losing Miller for nothing.

Grant Hill to the Magic for Chucky Atkins and Ben Wallace.  This goes far enough back where the details get a bit sketchy, but it looks like the Magic had enough cap room to sign two max FA's outright and agreed to a sign-and-trade to give Hill a 7-year max deal.

Tracy McGrady to the Magic for a 1st round pick.  Sketchier again, as I can't remember or find out why McGrady was traded for so little despite being just a 3rd year player.  I'm assuming he was unrestricted.  The Magic had just brought in Hill and still had the cap room to sign McGrady, and they again agreed to S&T to give McGrady the full 7-year contract.

RESTRICTED FAs:

Restricted FAs require sign-and-trades if the acquiring team wants to avoid the offer sheet process, so their cost has been higher.

Joe Johnson to the Hawks for Boris Diaw and two 1sts.  The Hawks had the cap space for Johnson's 5-year, $70 mil deal.  The Suns were considering matching the offer (JJ was a restricted FA), but chose to honor Johnson's wish and let him walk in exchange for Diaw and two 1sts.

Eddy Curry to the Knicks for a 1st and a right to swap another 1st.  Bulls had the right to match any offer, the Knicks wanted him, so he was swapped essentially for what became Tyrus and Noah.  The Knicks were above the cap when this happened.

Kenyon Martin to the Nuggets for three 1st round picks.  The Nuggets had the cap space for a max deal, but because Martin was restricted, they paid the Nets 3 first-round picks as compensation.

A few thoughts:

(1) I'm surprised by the consistent (lack of) compensation received by former teams of unrestricted players, and it makes me think that if LeBron/Wade/Bosh want to come here, we'd only have to give up a 1st or so in return.  

(2) Rudy Gay, Randy Foye, Anthony Morrow, Kyle Lowry, JJ Redick, Sergio Rodriguez are restricted free agents, and the cost of acquiring a restricted FA can be ridiculously high.  The Nuggets, for example, had to pay $90 million AND three 1st round picks to get Kenyon Martin (!!).  Not that the players above will command much more than a 1st in most cases, but the trade cost should be factored in, especially for a Bulls team that will need the 1sts for depth.

(3) Why haven't there been more Brad Miller type S&T's to over-the-cap contenders?  That trade scares me because that means, in theory, every team has a shot at LeBron/Wade/Bosh.  I just can't figure out why this hasn't happened more often.  Dozens and dozens of talented players have been unrestricted free agents in the past 15 years, yet there's just one instance of this happening?  Any ideas?

My only guess is it could just be a GM freeze-out thing like we saw with Ernie Grunfeld and the Celtics deal he didn't make.  A GM who trades LeBron/Wade/Bosh/Amare/Boozer/Johnson to a contender for crap just to avoid losing his player for nothing probably burns a lot of important bridges.

Overall, it looks like getting under the cap increased our chances of landing a blue chipper.  I'm not suggesting the Bulls + Gordon + Tyrus would've been a contender that would force a GM freeze-out; but it's just that S&Ts to teams without cap space have been so rare.

ON OFFENSE

Stats, per 36:
Player A: 17.0 points, 2.6 orebs, 1.2 ast, 1.8 tov, .488 FG%, 6.4 FTA, .549 TS%
Player B: 13.6 points, 2.2 orebs, 1.8 ast, 2.8 tov, .483 FG%, 4.8 FTA, .523 TS%

Similar, though Player A has a higher usage and is slightly more efficient.  Here are their shooting numbers:

Jumpshots:
Player A: 54% of attempts, 37.1 eFG%
Player B: 54% of attempts, 38.5 eFG%

Close non-dunks:
Player A: 27% of attempts, 45.9 eFG%
Player B: 31% of attempts, 45.8 eFG%

Dunks:
Player A: 16% of attempts, 92.6 eFG%
Player B: 13% of attempts, 92.0 eFG%

Tips:
Player A: 3% of attempts, 53.6 eFG%
Player B: 2% of attempts, 25.0 eFG%

Player A has the Tips advantage, but it's such a tiny percentage of attempts it's barely a factor.  Apart from that, the numbers are eerily close.

Player A is Hakim Warrick the past two years (on Memphis and Milwaukee).
Player B is Tyrus Thomas this season.

The numbers say Warrick is slightly better offensively, but their styles are similar.  They're extremely athletic, they'll give you lots of easy points from dunks and free throws, and as a bonus, Warrick doesn't turn the ball over.  On the flip side, they're mediocre on the offensive glass, poor at scoring inside, and have terrible shot selection.  Here's a Warrick highlight video for a taste of what we'll be seeing.

ON DEFENSE

Per 36 stats:
0.8 steals, 0.6 blocks, 4.8 drebs

Just awful stats for a power forward.  

For perspective, in rate terms, Warrick averaged a 1.1 STL% and 1.3 BLK% over the past two years.  Add them together for 2.4%, and that ranks 8th worst in the NBA among PFs/Cs (Haslem, Scola, Randolph, Lee, Jamison, Bonner, Murphy).  Of those 8, Warrick's 16.2 dREB% is the worst.

Those numbers alone don't necessarily mean Warrick's a terrible defender.  Jason Collins, for example never put up big stats either and was very good defensively because he was a widebody who sealed the post.  But Warrick's a beanpole.

OVERALL

The numbers suggest Warrick's a slightly better version of Tyrus offensively, and downright awful defensively.  Neither description is particularly good.  And that shows up in Adjusted Plus Minus.

From 2006-2009, Warrick's -6.40 APM ranked 4th worst in the NBA (Damien Wilkins, Juwan Howard, Eddy Curry) among players who played over 5000 minutes.  Warrick's 2008-2009 basketballvalue APM was -5.19, and his current two-year APM stands at -3.62.  

(Note: 2-year APMs come with a high error, so I wouldn't draw any conclusions from those numbers alone.  But the 4-year APM has a much lower error, and when a 4-year APM, more recent two-year APMs and the Per36 stats all point to the same thing, there's a higher and higher probability that it's close to the truth.)

I'm happy we've traded Salmons for an expiring, and I honestly couldn't care less about how this season turns out.  But for those hoping Warrick helps us earn a playoff berth, the numbers suggest Warrick will hurt us more than help.

[From the Fanposts. Real cool stuff from YaoPau, supplying caution for the Bulls prospective 2010 FA signing. It's still not a given that he'd leave Atlanta given their success. But between the Bulls media pumping him up, the Arn Tellem connection, and the likely desperation (and not exactly unwarranted) from the Bulls to sign someone to a max deal, this is one of the most likely possibilities of next summer. -ed]

I keep hearing Joe Johnson is the #4 option if we strike out on LeBron/Wade/Bosh.  His resume fits that ranking: 4-straight all-star appearances, 22ppg scorer, good 3pt shot, good passer, plays 40mpg with almost no injury history, and he's the offensive star of a Hawks team headed toward 55 wins.

But it's his age - he turns 29 in four months - that makes me cautious.  The Bulls have a thin rotation already, and we stand to lose Tyrus, Miller, and either Hinrich/Salmons before the start of next season.  With Rose and Noah still developing, and rotation pieces needing to be acquired, our window for contention if we miss LeBron/Wade is probably a couple years away.

I'd expect Johnson to remain a star at ages 29 and 30.  But after that, when we'll really need him, what can we expect?

(much more after the jump...)

Continue reading this post »

23 games into the season, the Bulls stood at 8-15, and had a per game point differential of -13.5 from games 11 to 23.  Then we beat the Knicks, and we've gone 14-7 since.

Here are the Per36 numbers of our key cogs before and after that game (one note: I used game logs from cbs sports, and I just noticed they haven't added last night's game yet, so these numbers don't include that game.  Shouldn't change the stats much though).  The first line is before, the second line is after:

Rose
16.8 pts, 3.1 reb, 5.7 ast, 0.9 stl, 0.3 blk, 3.0 to, .484 TS%, 14.3 PER
22.3 pts, 4.3 reb, 6.0 ast, 0.7 stl, 0.4 blk, 2.6 to, .534 TS%, 21.0 PER

Hinrich
10.3 pts, 3.2 reb, 5.1 ast, 1.2 stl, 0.5 blk, 2.9 to, .412 TS%, 6.9 PER
12.6 pts, 4.1 reb, 5.3 ast, 1.1 stl, 0.2 blk, 1.5 to, .527 TS%, 13.3 PER

Salmons
13.0 pts, 3.6 reb, 2.4 ast, 1.7 stl, 0.7 blk, 1.5 to, .477 TS%, 11.5 PER
14.7 pts, 3.9 reb, 2.6 ast, 1.0 stl, 0.2 blk, 1.4 to, .595 TS%, 14.4 PER

Deng
16.6 pts, 7.2 reb, 1.7 ast, 1.1 stl, 0.8 blk, 1.6 to, .519 TS%, 16.8 PER
16.4 pts, 6.5 reb, 2.3 ast, 0.6 stl, 1.2 blk, 2.0 to, .528 TS%, 15.6 PER

Taj
12.1 pts, 9.0 reb, 0.9 ast, 1.0 stl, 1.6 blk, 2.1 to, .503 TS%, 12.4 PER
12.3 pts, 10.0 rb, 0.9 ast, 0.8 stl, 1.4 blk, 1.6 to, .522 TS%, 14.2 PER

Tyrus
10.9 pts, 7.6 reb, 1.1 ast, 0.0 stl, 4.4 blk, 0.0 to, .460 TS%, 15.2 PER (played just two games)
12.4 pts, 9.7 reb, 1.9 ast, 2.1 stl, 2.9 blk, 3.0 to, .486 TS%, 15.7 PER

Noah
10.8 pts, 12.9 reb, 2.7 ast, 0.8 stl, 2.0 blk, 2.1 to, .518 TS%, 17.1 PER
14.3 pts, 13.6 reb, 2.0 ast, 0.7 stl, 1.7 blk, 2.4 to, .591 TS%, 19.3 PER

Miller
12.7 pts, 7.6 reb, 3.6 ast, 0.7 stl, 0.5 blk, 2.1 to, .519 TS%, 12.6 PER
12.1 pts, 6.7 reb, 2.3 ast, 0.9 stl, 1.0 blk, 1.6 to, .526 TS%, 12.2 PER

One other thing I haven't seen mentioned: Rose's Per36 assists by location, before and after the Knicks game.

5.7 total; 1.4 at rim, 0.2 within 10ft, 3.1 for 2pt jumpers, 0.9 for 3's <- Before
6.0 total; 2.2 at rim, 0.4 within 10ft, 1.8 for 2pt jumpers, 1.6 for 3's <- After

Rank these Power Forwards in order of who you want the Bulls to give a 5-year contract to.  Next to each player is their PER since 2009, their APM from 2006-2009, their FG% on close shots since 2009, their age, and their average games played per season over their careers.

Player A: 20.5 PER, +0.88 APM, 54% Close, age 27, 63.3 games played per season
Player B: 18.9 PER, +1.10 APM, 59% Close, age 28, 63.1 games played per season
Player C: 20.0 PER, +1.68 APM, 60% Close, age 26, 71.9 games played per season

Player names are in the comments.

In light of this comment, that

"One NBA scout courtside insisted that, "Vinny ran three [different] plays the whole half and barely made any [play] calls. We don’t even know what to write down. They had a lot more variety last year, a lot more ball movement. It was almost like Vinny said, ‘Screw it, you guys figure it out.’ "

I decided to check the game film from that Knicks game.  I used a crappy computer which could barely play the 1.6gig file smoothly, so I only charted the 1st quarter.  Here are the Bulls plays along with # of passes and # of players who touched the ball in parenthesis.  Note: I only counted passes after the offense was finally reset, so little passes back and forth before anything happened on a possession were ignored.

Continue reading this post »

The Bulls since MJ left town:

12 years...  5 head coaches...  14 top-sixteen draft picks... 338-554 W-L record.
#1 in the NBA four of the last six years in Operating Income.
0 luxury tax dollars paid.

If this happened with any other team (besides maybe the Cubs, more on that later), the media would tear management apart.  Owners like Al Davis and Donald Sterling have been mocked continuously.  The Bears have three bad seasons and fans call for everyone's head.

But the Bulls, 12 years into one of the worst extended runs in professional sports, continue gliding by with little criticism.  Despite all of Jerry's cheapness, I've seen just two reporters call him out on it.  One works for FanHouse.com, the other for ChicagoNow.  Despite all of Vinny's awful coaching decisions, I've seen just one reporter ask him about his job security, and he works for The Score.

Where is the Tribune?  The Sun-Times?  ESPN1000?  Comcast?  Chicago has plenty of media outlets that have no problem railing on the Bears, but stay quiet when the Bulls screw up worse, and for a longer period of time.

I did a little digging, and found Jerry plays a role in all of this.  Some of this might be already known, but I had no idea until recently:

1) The reason Reinsdorf originally bought the Bulls.  From an SI article in 1997:

"I felt owning the Bulls would help with the White Sox, since it would give me more leverage when dealing with sponsors."

More leverage, hmm.  Let's see how he's played his cards...

2) Reinsdorf and WMVP (ESPN1000)

In 2004, when Jay Mariotti was working for the Sun-Times, he was highly critical of Reinsdorf's management of the White Sox.  Reinsdorf was pissed about it, but as long as Mariotti was working for the Sun-Times, he was powerless to stop it.

But that February, WMVP (the station that aired Bulls games, now known as ESPN1000) gave Mariotti his own morning show.  Reinsdorf wasn't happy, with these quotes from the Tribune:

The chairman of the Sox and Bulls ... thought he had a voice in what airs on WMVP.

Reinsdorf expressed his views through his public relations director, Scott Reifert:

"The thing we question is that they have invested millions of dollars in promoting these teams," Reifert said. "Now they are bringing in somebody who has made it his business to devalue those investments. It doesn't make sense from a business perspective."

One other tiff occurred when Marc SIlverman and Carmen DeFalco interviewed Reinsdorf in April.  Evidently, Jerry expected an interview about Opening Day baseball while the hosts asked about other topics.  Jerry responded with:

''I hope you enjoyed [the interview] because I won't be on with you guys again. You conducted this interview under false pretenses, and you won't get another bite at the apple.''

The merit of the questions aside, the timing of this event and Mariotti's hiring was not great for WMVP, as noted in this Sun-Times article the next day:

"The station is negotiating a new contract with Reinsdorf to retain the broadcast rights for both teams, and the interview won't help"

You know what happened next.  Mariotti was fired in December, prompting this report from the Tribune:

Jay Mariotti is off Chicago’s airwaves, and he says his departure from ESPN Radio’s WMVP-AM 1000 is the result of the station’s desire to curry favor with the White Sox and Bulls.

Mariotti said the station asked him to tone down his criticism of the Bulls and White Sox, whose games are broadcast on WMVP and whose contracts are close to expiring.

In a big fuck you to WMVP, Reinsdorf instead signed a 4-year deal to broadcast games on WCKG, with this lovely quote included:

In conjunction with the move, the Bulls also announced they will be bringing all radio production and sales efforts "in-house." All aspects relating to the production of game broadcasts and the sale of advertising inventory for those broadcasts will be controlled by the team.

The next year, WCKG changed formats, and WMVP brought the Bulls back a year later and continue broadcasting the games today.  They still allow the Bulls to use their own radio team, and (in my opinion as a listener) have dramatically softened their criticism of the team.  Lesson learned.

3) Reinsdorf and Comcast SportsNet

Do you know who owns Comcast SportsNet?  Reinsdorf!

Maybe I'm just naive, but I had no idea.  He owns a 40% stake, with Rocky Wirtz owning 20%, Tom Ricketts owning 20%, and Comcast owning the remaining 20%.  Comcast SportsNet's wikipedia entry mentions that:

Comcast SportsNet Chicago was created so the teams mentioned could have editorial control over their broadcasts, unlike the past 'produced by' arrangements with the now-defunct FSN Chicago.

Weird.  So the entire broadcast (with halftime and postgame analysis) is produced by the Bulls.  And the entire radio broadcast is produced by the Bulls.  When Jason Goff wondered why his VDN job security question was "deemed inappropriate by Mark Schanowski and Kendall Gill" it's because Schanowki and Gill work for Reinsdorf.

Speaking of Comcast...

4) Reinsdorf and the Tribune

We know KC Johnson is often featured on Comcast's pregame broadcasts.  But he's also often featured on another Comcast show: Chicago Tribune Live.  The city's biggest newspaper has a show on Reinsdorf's channel.  Add to it that the Tribune company was also a part owner in Comcast with Reinsdorf for years, and that Sam Zell (the Tribune's previous owner) was a part owner of the White Sox prior to his Cubs purchase, and there's reasons galore for a pro-Bulls bias.

Who knows what happens now that the Tribune sold its Comcast share to Ricketts.  There's still plenty of JerryMoney floating in to keep them on their best behavior, but maybe (hopefully) this will signal a slight diversion.

Others...

I couldn't find anything directly connecting Reinsdorf and the Sun-Times or Daily Herald or The Score, which could partially explain the support for McGraw and Goff in these parts.

Overall

This post along with Mind of Dorf isn't so much to argue that Reinsdorf is the reason for the Bulls failures (Pax and Skiles and VDN all deserve blame), but Reinsdorf is the reason why things have been so slow to turn around.  

When you fail to pay the luxury tax, fail to bring in a proven coach, fail to extend your players, and play the media so that 1) your production team covers all local TV and radio broadcasts, 2) you own the biggest stake in your city's local sports channel, and 3) you have in's with the city's biggest sports radio station and 4) newspaper... there's very little incentive to get your shit in gear, especially as the money continues to pour in.

In the meantime, send Jason Goff some praise.  It's pathetic that only one reporter is willing to ask tough questions, but I want him to know he's got support among the fans.  Hopefully Thonus continues to be critical of the organization as well.

SoulEater linked to a video showing Reinsdorf talking about being from Brooklyn and making oodles of money.  There's a small discussion going on at that fanshot, but I think there's more to this, as looking at things from Reinsdorf's perspective gives logical reasons for the ostensibly dumb decisions Bulls management has made.  Thus, this.

First, a couple quotes from the video stuck out to me:

I came to Chicago to go to law school.  After I graduated, I stayed in Chicago and worked as an attorney, then I became a tax lawyer at a private practice, then I got involved in making real estate investments for clients, and after that sport.  I had a lot of luck along the way. I had a company that I built up and then sold, and then two years later the real estate business went south.  So I'm glad I sold it when I did, I wouldn't have gotten nearly as much money as I did, so there's the luck of it.

Kenny Williams' job is to identify talent and evaluate talent.  My job is to make sure he doesn't spend too much money on it.

It's easy to look at Reinsdorf as the idiot cheapskate who hired VDN (ha!), blew the D'Antoni signing (haha!) and lost Gordon (Haaaaaaa!) for nothing.  But in reality, this guy's brilliant.  According to his wikipedia, he wasn't born into money, but he got into GW undergrad, Northwestern Law, then after a few different jobs, he started a company he sold nine years later for $102 million.  He bought the White Sox a year earlier for $19 million, then got a controlling interest in the Bulls by paying $9.2 million.  Fast forward 25 years, and those teams are worth nearly $1 billion combined.  Damn.  And you know what that means...

We've got a self-made billionaire in charge!!  And in most cases, that's a good thing!  Except there's another quote from his wikipedia:

A life-long baseball fan who grew up in the shadows of Ebbets Field, Reinsdorf was in the stands the day Jackie Robinson debuted for the Brooklyn Dodgers, breaking the color barrier which prevented black players from serving on Major League teams.

Oops.  Our self-made billionaire is a baseball fan.  Remember him saying he'd trade all six of his Bulls championships for one White Sox championship?  Years later, I think he meant it.

BULL MARKET

Forbes has ranked the most valuable NBA franchises each of the past five years, and notes their profit from the past season.  And granted, Jerry has a huge metropolitan area all to himself, and having MJ's banner in the stadium helps mightily.  But other franchises are in big markets too, and some have current superstars on their team.  And even though the Bulls were mediocre last year and terrible over the past decade, Jerry pocketed $55 million last year.  That's #1 in the NBA, ahead of the Lakers and well ahead of the Magic and Spurs and Celtics.  10 teams lost money last year.  Not Jerry.  Show 'em the stats!

$55 million profit in 2008 (#1 in NBA)
$59 million profit in 2007 (#1 in NBA)
$48 million profit in 2006 (#1 in NBA)
$35 million profit in 2005 (#3 in NBA)
$37 million profit in 2004 (#1 in NBA)

Who else can say THREEPEAT!??!

Huge profits, few wins.  Reinsdorf is running the team like an investor.  And when you view his transactions from that perspective more things start to make sense.

THE GORDON PROBLEM

Take the contract Gordon signed with Detroit: 5 years, $66 million.  Seems like fair value for an efficient 20ppg scorer, right?  Let's take the perspective of a financial investment.

First off, the payout side.  Gordon's scheduled to make $10 million this year, but if you replace Pargo's salary with Gordon's, the puts our payroll at $77 million, or $8 million into the luxury tax.  Add in the $3 million or so of luxury tax revenues we'd forfeit by leaping into the tax, and Gordon would've cost Jerry $10+$8+$3= $21 million this year, and at least $77 million over the five year contract.

Now for what Gordon brings in this year.  If I'm reading the following linked article correctly, NBA teams already share TV and Merchandise revenue.  Any extra jersey sales or TNT games that Gordon would bring in (admittedly relatively little) wouldn't factor into Reinsdorf's bank account.  Therefore, the financial benefit of Gordon comes from:

(1) Increased Regular Season Ticket Sales ...except the Bulls lead the league in ticket sales this year, and have sold out most of the last ten years.  Granted, there have been some 300-level discounts this year, but that likely wouldn't have changed with Gordon aboard.

(2) Playoff Home Games ... Each extra game brings in a packed house!  Except, how much would Gordon actually add?  On SoulEater's fanshot, I said that on July 1st, I would've guessed the Bulls could've expected 2.5 home playoff games this season without Gordon.  We figured we'd be a #5/#6 seed, and probably lose 4-1, 4-2, or 4-3.  That's between 2 and 3 home games.  With Gordon, what would've been our expectations?  3 playoff home games?  3.5?

And playoff per game revenue might not be as high as you think.  Here's a quote from a relevant article I found about the Jazz:

For years, it's been rumored that NBA teams pocket about $1 million for each home playoff game. But that figure, Rigby said, is high. For one thing, the NBA takes a 45-percent cut of each home gate during the playoffs (up from just 6 percent per home game during the regular season) to cover its annual expenses.

Even at $1 million per home game, having Gordon on board would only net an expected $1 million extra.  Even with the crappiness of our current team, adding Gordon likely adds just $2-3 million.

I'm not an expert at this, and there's a chance I'm leaving something out.  But from what I see, combine those two, and having Gordon this year probably adds just a small fraction of that $21 million to Jerry's bottom line.  And yes, Gordon gives you a better chance at a superstar via sign and trade, providing what would be a long-term increase in revenue.  But that's risky, and besides, there's a chance you could sign a superstar outright.   Also, it's true Gordon can provide more regular season wins and playoff home games over the course of 5 years.  But at a $77 million cost, that's a looooot of extra wins he'd need to provide, making it pretty damn improbable.

THE REST

Add in the immediate breakup of the dynasty, the cheap coaches, the trading of Brand and Artest before extension talks, the trading of Chandler for expirings, the trading of Curry for cheaper rookies, the loss of Gordon and probably Tyrus for nothing before their extensions, and it makes sense.  Like sheep, Bulls fans (me included) continue to pack the stadium regardless of the product, giving Reinsdorf zero incentive to pay more than he has to to keep the media (which it seems like he has a hand in again (see: KC Johnson, ESPN radio, Comcast commentators who rarely say a bad word about him)) off his back.

That said, I don't think any of this makes him anything besides a good businessman.  I as a fan couldn't give a crap about Reinsdorf the person, I just want him to spend his own money for my benefit.  So why should he give a crap about me?  He is what he is, and by nature he operates to earn.

If there's any good news, it's that I trust Jerry when he says he'll go into the luxury tax if he feels that would make the Bulls a final four team, because it makes financial sense.  Take a team to the Finals, and season tickets and premium suites sell like hotcakes.  The good advertising and branding alone is worth millions, the sponsorship deals tens of millions more.  The problem is getting to that point.

And the solution, of course, is simple: empty seats.

[Thanks to YaoPau for today's game preview -ed.]

Do you Noah good rebounder? I do.

pa-ching.

Maybe we should start calling it Cantada, because they can't rebound.

pa-ching.

Bosh does well at 11reb per 36, then it's Bargnani's 6.8, Turkoglu's 4.5, Jack's 3.0, Calderon's 2.8. When Taj Gibson would be your team's 2nd best rebounder, you better be awesome at everything else.

Continue reading this post »

I wasn't as high on Tyrus as some, but I would've never, ever guessed he'd be in the doghouse 3 games into the season.  Now I wouldn't be surprised if we trade him for next to nothing.

With this coming on the heels of letting Gordon walk, it's easy to see a trend developing.  But the sad thing is this has been going on for years.  Here's the long line of talented young players the Bulls have traded for pennies on the dollar, or let go for nothing:

ELTON BRAND

• Bulls Performance: Two 20/10 seasons on the Bulls
• Bulls' Publicized Concern:  Elton wasn't happy, there were rumors he didn't want to extend, Krause didn't think he was a superstar.
• Trade and Aftermath: Brand for Chandler, Brand goes on to make two all-star games during six straight 18/9 seasons.
• String o' Trades: Brand -> Chandler ... Chandler -> PJ Brown, JR Smith ... JR Smith -> Aaron Gray.

RON ARTEST

• Bulls Performance: Started nearly every game over 2.5 years playing 31mpg.  Terrible shooter, but defensive star with the ability to penetrate and pass.
• Bulls' Publicized Concern: Artest's maturity, and like Brand, Jerry Krause didn't think Artest was a superstar to build around.
• Trade and Aftermath: Artest and 26-year old Brad Miller for Jalen Rose.  Artest became crazy, but also one of the league's elite complementary players, making an all-star team.  Miller made two all-star teams.  Jalen fizzled immediately and was traded two years later for Antonio Davis.
• String o' Trades: Artest, Miller -> Rose ... Rose, Donyell Marshall -> Antonio Davis.

TYSON CHANDLER

• Bulls Performance: Averaged 25mpg from ages 19-23, starting 50 games his final year with the Bulls.  He was below average offensively, but gained a reputation as a top rebounder and defender while anchoring the 2nd rated defense in 2005.
• Bulls' Publicized Concern:  Endurance issues made him tire late in games and limited his minutes.  And at the time, he wasn't Ben Wallace.
• Trade and Aftermath: Chandler for PJ Brown and JR Smith.  Chandler finished top-10 in the league in DReb% the next two seasons before injuries limited him last season.  He's still just 27.
• String o' Trades: Chandler -> PJ Brown, JR Smith ... JR Smith -> Aaron Gray

JR SMITH

• Bulls Performance: None.
• Bulls Publicized Concerns: Bulls coaches didn't like him.
• Trade and Aftermath: Smith for what turned out to be Aaron Gray.  Smith is still a poor defender with legitimate maturity issues, but he scored 16ppg in the playoffs over the past two years.  He's grown into one of the league's best 3pt shooters, making 40% while attempting 9 per 36min.

BEN GORDON

• Bulls Performance: Averaged 18ppg for five seasons as a top sharpshooter, led the Bulls in points scored all five years.
• Bulls Publicized Concern: Rumored "me-first" attitude, rift with VDN, below average defense, debatable fit with Derrick Rose.
• Trade and Aftermath: Bulls let him walk for nothing.

OTHERS...

Jamal Crawford - Averaged 17ppg for us at age 23 before we traded him essentially for Othella Harrington after Paxson cited improving team defense and commitment.

Matt Bonner - Now the starting PF for the Spurs.  We traded him for Chris Duhon.

Chris Duhon - Now the starting PG for the Knicks.  Played 25mpg for us for four years. We lost him for nothing after numerous reports that he missed team meetings.

Roger Mason - Was never given a shot here.  Started 71 games for the Spurs last year, making 42% of 3s.  We lost him for nothing.

Thabo Sefolosha - Decent defender, good rebounder, terrible offensively, but still just 24 years old when we traded him for Taj Gibson.  Currently starts for the Thunder.

!!!!!!Eddy Curry!!!!!!! - The one time we've actually benefited from identifying a guy was going to suck!  Traded him for Tyrus Thomas and Joakim Noah. 

OVERALL

The Eddy Curry ripping of Isiah Thomas aside...

We've Traded/Let Go: 

Elton Brand
Ron Artest
Brad Miller
Tyson Chandler
Ben Gordon
JR Smith
Jamal Crawford
Matt Bonner
Chris Duhon
Roger Mason
Thabo Sefolosha

And Got in Return: 

Tyson Chandler
JR Smith
PJ Brown
Jalen Rose
Aaron Gray
Othella Harrington
Chris Duhon
Taj Gibson

Which Turned Out To Be: 
PJ Brown
Antonio Davis
Aaron Gray
Othella Harrington
Taj Gibson

Which Currently Is:
Aaron Gray
Taj Gibson

No wonder VDN wants to play Taj so bad! Since the Brand/Chandler trade, we've posted a combined record of 287-373, with two winning seasons and one playoff series victory.

TYRUS' SITUATION

Now another young, talented player looks to be halfway out the door before getting a chance to develop.  Like Brand's happiness, Artest's maturity, the staff's not liking Smith, Gordon, Crawford (weird how often this happens), there are concerns, some probably legitimate.

But to me in these situations, there should be two options.  

1) Play the guy a ton, recognize internally that he's not going to develop into a star, then move him for better young talent (like we did with Eddy Curry and tried to do with Brand), or

2) Play the guy a ton, and extend him.

The worst, worst, WORST thing to do is bench him, leak your concerns about him to the press, and then try to trade him or let him walk.  Especially with a guy like Tyrus who, with his filled box scores and highlight reel plays, would make some GMs salivate.

In my $20 fantasy football league, this tactic is obvious to everyone - when you want to trade someone, put him in your starting lineup and say you like the guy, then when you make him available good offers will pour in.  You'd think a $500 million dollar franchise would figure out the same.

In 2007, Luol averaged 18.8ppg on .560 TS%.  Take out that season, and his career TS% is .515.  We're all hoping for a resurgent season.

Here's something I haven't noticed before, though.  His positional splits from that season (per 48 minutes):

SF: 22.9pts, .502 eFG%, 5.4 FTA, .543 TS%
PF: 29.6pts, .594 eFG%, 6.8 FTA, .633 TS%

Oddly enough, for as well as Deng played at PF in 2007, his minutes at PF have dipped since.  Approximate minutes played at PF since '07:

2007: 518 minutes, 17% of his playing time
2008: 161 minutes, 8% of his playing time
2009: 162 minutes, 10% of his playing time

Overall splits from 2007-2009, again per 48 minutes:

SF: 22.5pts, 5.5 fta, 8.6reb, 3.3ast, 2.5to, .532 TS%
PF: 26.8pts, 6.5 fta, 10.6reb, 2.3ast, 2.1to, .597 TS%

The low TS% at SF seems to correlate to his jumpshot percentages over the past three seasons:

2007: 42.6 eFG%, 61% of FGA were jumpshots
2008: 40.6 eFG%, 61% of FGA were jumpshots
2009: 38.1 eFG%, 66% of FGA were jumpshots

Luol's jumpshot is partly to blame, and I expect it to top 40% again this year now that he's healthy.  But the data seems to suggest that Luol's return to 2007 efficiency is also dependent upon playing more PF.  With the news that James Johnson is practicing exclusively at SF, I'd say the chances are good.

Here's what I know about last season:

1) We gave several stiffs big minutes.

• Larry Hughes averaged 26.4mpg in 30 games for us. 
• Drew Gooden averaged 29.6mpg in 31 games. 
• Andres Nocioni played 24.1mpg in 53 games.
• Gray, Hughes, Gooden, Nocioni and Sefolosha combined for 67 starts.

2) Joakim, Tyrus, Rose, and Deng were really bad over long stretches last year.

• Joakim's numbers in November (15.9mpg, 3.1ppg, 0.8apg, 5.1rpg, 40% shooting) were bad.  He wasn't a regular rotation player, and played 30mpg just once in his first 30 (!) games.
• Tyrus was equally bad in November. In 19.9mpg, he shot 35.4% from the field. That play lost him his starting job. He  got it back two months later, and finally hit his stride in February.
• Rose struggled to score for most of the season.  From December through March (58 games), he posted a 50.2 TS%.
• Deng's .511 TS%, 10.1 TRB%, and 9.0 AST% were each his lowest marks since his rookie season.

Yet we still won 41 games.  Shouldn't we easily be better this year?  Let's break it down further...

POSITION BY POSITION

From 82games....

PG - 2008 minutes breakdown: Rose 75%, Hinrich 15%, Hunter 5%, Gordon 3%

Similar breakdown this year, with Pargo replacing Gordon's 3%. I'm assuming Rose will improve, meaning the PG position as a whole should improve, even if Hinrich falls off a tad.

SG - 2008 minutes breakdown: Gordon 64%, Hinrich 18%, Hughes 8%, Thabo 4%, Salmons 1%

Salmons takes Gordon's minutes, and Hinrich and Pargo absorb the remaining 36%. Slightly worse starter, better bench. Overall, I think it's about a wash.

SF - 2008 minutes breakdown: Deng 36%, Salmons 22%, Thabo 12%, Hughes 10%, Noc 7%, Gordon 6%, Tim Thomas 2%

Thabo, Hughes, Noc, Tim Thomas and other scrubs (LJ3, Nichols) combined for around 1/3 of our SF minutes. This year, Deng, Salmons, Johnson, and Hinrich take the full load, with Deng hopefully taking 60%+ of it. Deng returning to form (even 07-08 form) significantly improves this position.

PF - 2008 minutes breakdown: Tyrus 48%, Noc 23%, Gooden 8%, Noah 7%, Deng 4%, Tim Thomas 4%

Tyrus, Luol, and James Johnson will take most of the minutes, with Noah and Taj filling in. We aren't strong at PF, but we were really really bad last season.

C - 2008 minutes breakdown: Noah 41%, Miller 18%, Gray 17%, Gooden 14%, Tyrus 6%, Noc 1%

Noah and Miller should take 80+% of the minutes. If Noah just starts the season well, we'll get a boost over last year. Miller absorbs Gooden's minutes, and that'll help on both sides of the ball.

That's three positions with improvements (PG, SF, C), and two where we're probably about the same (SG, PF).

OVERALL, THE OUTLOOK

We lose Gordon's 82 games. But we can get 55 more from Salmons, 55 more from Miller, 32 more from Deng, 30 more from Hinrich. Noah and Tyrus probably won't waste their first 20 games like they did last year. I doubt Rose has another 58 game slump. VDN now has 89 games under his belt.  Overall we're in line to improve.

And here's what I know about the rest of the Eastern Conference: the Heat lost Jamario Moon for nothing, and Beasley had a rough offseason. The Bucks lost half their team. The Pacers lost Jack and Nesterovic and added Hansbrough. Detroit added perimeter scorers, but defense is a question. The Bobcats traded Okafor for Chandler, and drafted Gerald Henderson. Philly gets Brand back, but replaced Andre Miller with a 19 year old PG. The Raptors got Turkoglu and acquired some nice depth, but lost Marion and Anthony Parker. The Wizards got Randy Foye and Mike Miller and get Arenas/Haywood back. I admittedly like the Wizards this year, but besides them, nobody scares me.

Hollinger just projected us at 38 wins. fundamentallysound said that the apbrmetrics stat gurus all had us between 36-38 wins pretty consistently. And recently I've felt myself getting pessimistic about this season. But that pessimism doesn't make sense.

If we win 38 games, that's a 2008-level disappointment. We should win at least as many games again this year, and these signs point to a big improvement. 45 wins? 47? 50? I think it's possible, and rational.

I'm from Chicago and didn't get to watch many Texans games last year, curious about an oddity...

Your team finished 3rd in total offense last year with 382.1 yards per game.  You've got Schaub, and Slaton, and Andre, and Walter, and Owen Daniels, just loaded with talent.

Yet despite all those yards, the Texans scored just 37 offensive touchdowns, putting them behind teams like the Miami Dolphins, just ahead of my lowly Chicago Bears (35), and well behind a Saints (54) team that got just 30 more yards per game.

I'm thinking of taking Schaub in fantasy, but 24 TDs in 22 games as a starter doesn't make sense to me.  What's the reason for the lack of TDs?