SB Nation User Blog: YaoPau

Knicks get #29 pick from Lakers

YaoPau — Thu, 25 Jun 2009 17:51:33 -0000

Knicks get #29 pick from Lakers

From DraftExpress:

"A source with the New York Knicks tells us that they've acquired the #29 pick from the LA Lakers in exchange for 3 million dollars in cash."

The (Rejuvenated) Case for DeJuan Blair

YaoPau — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 17:41:58 -0000

Given what I heard Chad Ford say today, that DeJuan Blair's "knee problems" are just that he doesn't have ACLs - a "problem" Hines Ward has had since the age of 9 without issue (hat tip to NBA Observer) - he's shot back up to I Love Him At #16 status. Have a look...

Player Comparison Time!

Below are this year's stats for three power forwards, adjusted to 69.8 possessions, which are the number of possessions the Bulls play in 36 minutes. in other words, these are Per36 numbers, pace adjusted for Bulls pace:

Player A: 28.1 points, 17.8 rebs, 2.8 ast, 4.1 tov, 1.4 stl, 1.5 blk, 3.2pf ... 0.660 TS%, 31.7 USG, 20.27 years old

Player B: 24.4 points, 19.1 rebs, 1.9 ast, 1.9 tov, 2.4 stl, 1.5 blk, 4.2pf ... 0.608 TS%, 26.3 USG, 20.17 years old

Player C: 25.9 points, 10.1 rebs, 1.2 ast, 2.3 tov, 1.5 stl, 0.4 blk, 2.8pf ... 0.624 TS%, 26.7 USG, 23.64 years old

Players A and B put up video game / Moses Malone numbers, and Player C is a still-impressive yet distant third. A is the better offensive player - his 0.660 TS% on 31.7 USG is ridiculous, and his 2.8 assists are also impressive, especially considering how often he scores. B though, is no slouch offensively - 0.608 TS% on 26.3 USG is still outstanding, and his 1.9 turnovers is less than half of Player A's 4.1. He was the best rebounder of the group, and defensively his 2.4 steals and 1.5 blocks are a couple notches above.

Player C can score, but he seems to be lacking defensively and on the boards, and he's over 3 years older than Players A and B.

Player A is Blake Griffin, Player B is DeJuan Blair, Player C is Tyler Hansbrough.

Blair was as good as Griffin this year

For all the hoopla Blake Griffin got last year, Blair's numbers were just as good, and he put them up in the nation's toughest conference. And while it's easy to say "Griffin's the much better player", then question is why? Especially when defense and rebounding translate better to the NBA than offensive numbers.

Thankfully, it doesn't matter who's better between Griffin and Blair. Griffin will be taken #1 overall, and Blair will likely fall right behind him at #2 #5 #7... #16 (!!) It's an incredible steal.

Combine numbers, fit, etc

You know these by now. He's just 6'5", but his standing reach is 8'10.5", which puts him ahead of Griffin's and Hanbrough's 8'9". His 33" vertical is equal to Danny Green's, Marcus Thornton's, and Sam Young's. The guy's a freak. And I'm no medic, but I got the impression from Chad Ford's chat the knee issues are overblown. The issue is arthritis down the line, not higher risk for reinjury, and Hines Ward is an example of it not affecting one's career longterm.

And Blair fits well next to Noah. He anchored Pitt's defense, and has the girth we need to body up some of the league's strongest players. He has that offensive ability too, with post moves using either hand that he used to drop 22 points on Thabeet in a Pitt win this past year.

Terrence Williams looks to be gone to Charlotte at #12. Mullens probably goes to Detroit at #15. Lawson and Jennings seem like good value picks, but they're bad fits and they each have their question marks. Henderson's an option, but he doesn't fit with both Rose and Luol (lacks passing/3pt shooting), and his numbers this year were mediocre. Hansbrough's numbers haven't improved a lick since freshman year, and they were trumped this year by Blair's, especially defensively.

I see the logic in picking a high floor player we can package for a Bosh/Amare impact player, but in Blair we have a chance to draft that impact player now. Seriously. If his knees go, his knees go - it's a risk worth taking with a guy this good.

Chad Ford on Waddle and Silvy: Blair, Mullens, Johnson

YaoPau — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:25:37 -0000

Just heard him on my way to work on Waddle and Silvy... couple of interesting tidbits, and I'm paraphrasing...

On DeJuan Blair:

The problem with his knees is he has no ACLs. Evidently after his surgery to repair torn ACLs, they somehow got unattached again, and his body absorbed the tissue. Doctors opinions are mixed on what this means. Some are saying it's a good thing in a way, that he can't tear his ACL again. But they agree that down the line there will be problems with arthritis.

On BJ Mullens:

Silvy: We hear he's big and athletic and raw, is he like Joakim Noah?

Ford: No, actually he's really skilled, that's the weird thing. You see him in a workout and you're blown away, but you watch him on the court and he doesn't put it all together, and sometimes you question his effort. He reminds me a lot more of Darko Milicic - huge, athletic, skilled, but with the same quesionable effort and inability to translate his skills.

On James Johnson:

His dad's a champion kickboxer, and James initially followed that path, then picked up basketball at a later age. He's really talented and skilled, but he's like Tyrus Thomas in that he'll make some really poor decisions on the basketball court. His coaches have questioned his maturity, and honestly, with Tyrus Thomas on the team, I'm not sure why the Bulls would want to get another player who doesn't understand how to best use his talents to help the team.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Blair's situation makes sense to me now. I read in DraftExpress that after the Blair MRIs that got red flagged, Blair's camp sent NBA teams an MRI from 2008 along with an analysis from an independent doctor that said no deterioration in the knee took place over the last year, and I didn't quite get what was being red flagged.

He's just missing ACLs, this seems to be an issue of "how long will his career be", not "he's an increased risk for reinjury" like Leon Powe was. If Blair's career maxes out at 8 years now instead of 15, well, I'm completely fine with that. To me, his stock is back up and he's one of the guys I'd like us to get.

The Mullens-Darko comparison got me thinking... "How many athletic, skilled 7 footers haven't made NBA rotations? Sure there have been busts: Kwame, Curry, Darko, Olowokandi... but they've all been busts because they were top 4 picks. Had teams picked them at #16, they would've been good picks. I'd say the bust rate on Mullens is low, probably lower than anyone else we've discussed at #16.

James Johnson, I think, has a really high bust rate. His profile: really athletic, skilled, can't put it all together, no basketball IQ, questionable maturity - is the profile of just about every bust pick there is. The first time I saw we were interested in Johnson I wrote "I watched Wake in the ACC tournament, and all I remember is James Johnson jacking up ridiculous 3s in transition while his team was trying to comeback, missing them horribly and killing momentum. He’s a big skilled athletic dude, but man those shots were Tyrusesque in their dumbness." Then I saw his mixtape and salivated. Johnson sucks.

Rumored #11 Pick O' The Day: Gerald Henderson

YaoPau — Tue, 23 Jun 2009 06:44:08 -0000

Rumored #11 Pick O' The Day: Gerald Henderson

The Bulls have held trade talks with several teams about packaging picks Nos. 16 and 26 into one higher selection, with two league sources insisting the target is Duke shooting guard Gerald Henderson.

I haven't dug that deep into Henderson's resume, but he seems like a raw / high-upside player. His lack of passing and shooting ability make me think other options at #11 or #16 can contribute more right away, but this quote from draftexpress gives me hope:

Fortunately, Henderson is an athlete of the highest caliber, and that really shines through in some areas –namely his ability to finish around the basket. He ranked fourth in that category behind Jermaine Taylor (very limited sample size), Wayne Ellington and James Harden, and first in finishing off cuts, at a tremendous 77%. Surprisingly enough, though, Henderson ranks third to last amongst 19 shooting guards in terms of the amount of possessions he received in transition, which tells us quite a bit about Duke's half-court oriented approach.

Obviously he's talented, maybe the idea is the switch from Coach K to VDN will make the lightbulb go on.

James Johnson vs. Clemson: The Most Interesting Mixtape You'll See This Draft Season

YaoPau — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:30:53 -0000

James Johnson vs. Clemson: The Most Interesting Mixtape You'll See This Draft Season

SoulEater7 linked to this rumor on another thread that said the Bulls are looking to move up to #11 to select James Johnson.

I knew next to nothing about Johnson - barely saw him play this year, barely heard anything about him during the ACC tournament. I saw 6'8", 257lbs, with 8.5rpg last season, and assumed he's just another athletic, undersized PF. And then I saw this...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih2DyJLYw88

That's a 257lb guy taking it coast to coast... twice in one game for layups. Rebounding his own 3pt miss, then driving to the hoop past three players for the ridiculous jam (a must-see at 2:04).

Could the Bulls be looking at Johnson not at PF, or at SF, but at shooting guard? It looks like he has plenty of foot speed and handle for the 2. It's hard to say what his stats would be if he played in the backcourt in college, but from the looks of the tape, I'm really intrigued.

Edit: youtube update: he's does backflips too!

Bulls 2008-2009 Off/Def APM

YaoPau — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 02:36:42 -0000

Player	Minutes	APM	DiffOD	OAPM	DAPM
Hinrich, Kirk	1338.48	7.63	-2.47	2.58	5.05
Noah, Joakim	1911.23	4.59	-3.34	0.63	3.96
Thomas, Tim	1230.20	3.69	-5.13	-0.72	4.41
Gordon, Ben	2974.18	2.11	4.85	3.48	-1.37
Miller, Brad	2100.28	1.08	-0.24	0.42	0.66
Deng, Luol	1627.15	0.93	-5.25	-2.16	3.09
Rose, Derrick	2977.20	-0.52	5.99	2.73	-3.26
Gray, Aaron	692.70	-2.05	-7.35	-4.70	2.65
Thomas, Tyrus	2174.83	-7.21	-5.58	-6.40	-0.82
Salmons, John	2959.07	-7.70	4.05	-1.83	-5.88

Prepare for a run of qualifiers, these are uncharted waters for me...

I followed the instructions on Count The Basket and got it to work (I think)!!! Assuming I got it right (the splits look correct relative to 82games on/off stats... I got my 07-08 APM numbers to match then used the same method for 08-09, so no reason they shouldn't be right, they're just hard to verify), these are the offensive and defensive APM numbers for the Bulls this year. The overall APMs are slightly different than the ones from basketballvalue since they use a slightly different (and unpublished) method of calculating margin.

That's the good news. The bad news is 1-year APM numbers mean basically nothing :( The standard errors for some players are 5-6. But as far as I know, these are the only 2008-2009 Off/Def APM numbers available on the web right now, and I'll use this post as a precursor to a multi-year, low-noise APM I'll publish once I get my hands on a powerful-enough computer that'll run it without freezing.

While noise makes the overall APM useless, the difference between Offensive and Defensive APM is somewhat reliable. We knew Gordon and Rose were much better offensively than defensively, and vice versa for Noah and Tyrus, but I was surprised to see how much worse Salmons was on the defensive side, and how much better Luol was on the defensive side (an argument for his being effective at SG?). Luol's built a reputation on being a better offensive than defensive player, but (assuming noise wasn't the cause) that switched this season.

Just for kicks, the top players offensively:

Player	Minutes	APM	DiffOD	OAPM	DAPM
Wade, Dwayne	3048.32	20.07	10.83	15.45	4.62
Redd, Michael	1202.73	5.16	16.50	10.83	-5.67
Nash, Steve	2484.08	9.64	11.88	10.76	-1.12
James, LeBron	3054.18	16.38	4.95	10.67	5.71
Paul, Chris	2888.32	14.22	6.57	10.39	3.83
Telfair, Sebastian	2094.47	7.99	9.18	8.59	-0.59
Foye, Randy	2494.38	5.91	10.80	8.35	-2.45
Bryant, Kobe	2824.03	7.47	8.31	7.89	-0.42
Wafer, Von	1201.22	5.64	9.37	7.50	-1.86
Granger, Danny	2424.32	6.94	7.55	7.25	-0.31

and defensively:

Bogut, Andrew	1135.75	5.67	-16.81	-5.57	11.24
Kidd, Jason	2814.47	11.85	-7.01	2.42	9.43
Przybilla, Joel	1935.42	3.38	-14.80	-5.71	9.09
Camby, Marcus	1924.58	3.88	-14.29	-5.20	9.09
Odom, Lamar	2203.02	15.09	-1.90	6.59	8.49
Hayes, Jarvis	1831.68	6.09	-9.84	-1.87	7.97
Garnett, Kevin	1641.80	6.21	-9.61	-1.70	7.91
Iguodala, Andre	3269.05	12.07	-3.15	4.46	7.61
Ming, Yao	2454.02	7.69	-7.53	0.08	7.61
Martin, Kenyon	2083.77	5.43	-9.11	-1.84	7.27

(Note: DiffOD is the estimated difference between offensive and defensive effectiveness. A high DiffOD means you're good offensively and bad defensively.)

Whoa! Pre-draft Measurements are up!!

YaoPau — Fri, 29 May 2009 17:04:52 -0000

Whoa! Pre-draft Measurements are up!!

One of my favorite days of the year! I'll post more as I look into this, but a few things stand out height-wise:

- Blake Griffin is 6'8.25" without shoes, a bit undersized (same height as Hansbrough!)
- BJ Mullens is 6'11.75" without shoes, that's enormous and bigger than his college list.
- DaJuan Blair is 6'5.25" without shoes, which is about what I expected and possible cause for slipping to our first pick (!!)
- Terrence Williams is 6'5" without shoes, good news for those (me) wanting to take him if we don't get Blair.

Other notes:

Hansbrough I think checks out as most surprising overall, not only because he's taller than expected, but his 6'11.5" wingspan is fairly decent for a PF.

DaJuan Blair's 7'2" wingspan is scary. That's longer than BJ Mullens'.

Stephen Curry, Ty Lawson, Eric Maynor, and Chase Budinger have no wingspans. I'd expect nothing from them defensively.

Hasheem Thabeet checks out. He's taller than Shaq by 0.25" with the same 9'5" standing reach. Soft as he may be, he's in line to be an absolute defensive stud.

Edit #1: Looks like they're adding names to the list throughout the day... other notable names...

Jodie Meeks is 6'3" without shoes, that's better than I expected and bigger than Marcus Thornton and Stephen Curry. His 6'4.5" wingspan won't help, though.

My main man Luke Harangody is just 6'6.25" without shoes with just a 6'9.75" wingspan. Oh well.

I always liked Taj Gibson, and he measured well. 6'8.5" without shoes, and his 7'4" wingspan rivals Thabeet's.

James Harden (6'10.75" wingspan), Gerald Henderson (6'10.25" wingspan), and Tyreke Evans (6'11.25" wingspan) are all freaks. If Evans could shoot at all I think he'd be a great fit with Rose.

Austin Daye is actually taller than his already huge 6'10" list. He's 6'9.75" without shoes, making him a nearly 6'11" SF who can launch 3s. If we're thinking of trading Deng, Daye deserves a look at #16, soft as he is.

A Second Look at Luol

YaoPau — Wed, 27 May 2009 17:27:43 -0000

1-year APMs for Bulls players since 2004-2005, along with their overall weighted average:

Name	Minutes09	APM08	Minutes08	APM08	Minutes07	APM07	Minutes06	APM06	Minutes05	APM05	WtAvg
Miller	2100.28	-0.06	2512.87	9.11	1783	3.67	2923	11.07	2089	9.76	7.19
Deng	1627.15	1.42	2128.03	4.2	3072	5.58	2604	7.57	1663	4.29	4.98
Noah	1911.23	3.07	1533.68	4.58							3.74
Rose	2977.2	0.76									0.76
Gordon	2974.18	2.66	2291.23	-8.84	2704	3.03	2482	-0.25	2002	6.83	0.71
Timmy	1230.2	3.51	1939.72	-0.62	2054	2.87	666	-3.86	1940	-5.89	-0.64
Hinrich	1338.48	7.7	2379.62	-3.4	2840	-0.62	2955	-1.7	2800	-1.7	-0.76
Tyrus	2174.83	-7.82	1330.23	4.97	966	0.23					-2.28
Salmons	2959.07	-7.32	2517.02	-7.31	2139	-4.42	2059	-5.47	993	-6.65	-6.32

APM numbers have flaws, mainly their variance from year to year (Gordon from -8.84 to +2.66 and Hinrich from -3.4 to +7.7 overnight), but it's probably not a fluke when a player is consistently positive or negative. Luol's doing something right, and to judge him with just box score statistics and isolation ability is leaving something out.

Luol's team-first mentality makes up for his lack of athleticism/talent

I've been working on a statistical plus minus, and when I use basic stats, my system always underrates the Dengs, Battiers, Stojakovics while overrating the Gordons, Salmons, Durants. And then I saw this article on 82games that shows the effect of a good passing in an offense. They sum it up nicely in this chart:

Touches/Sec	Freq.	FG%	FTA/FGA	TO/FGA	PtsPoss
.01 to .14	25%	.442	.31	.15	92.8
.15 to .24	32%	.441	.27	.13	92.9
.25 to .34	23%	.505	.23	.12	105.6
.35 to .44	7%	.519	.28	.09	114.1
.45+	12%	.585	.55	.14	122.5

So if a possession takes 20 seconds and there are 3 touches (2 passes), that's 3/20=.15 touches/sec for an expected 92.9 offensive rating. If a possession takes 11 seconds and there are 5 touches (.454 touches/sec) the expected rating increases to 122.5.

That doesn't mean it's "pass back and forth a lot then shoot and you'll do better!" but it may mean there's a reason why players who play a team-first offense (high % of shots are assisted, decent passers, few turnovers, move well off the ball) have consistently higher than expected APMs.

Here's a look at the % of Team Field Goals Assisted when Miller, Deng, Gordon, and Salmons have been on vs. off the court in the past three seasons, along with their raw averages:

Name	AST%09on	AST%09off	AST%08on	AST%08off	AST%08on	AST%08off	AvgDiff
Miller	54.9	53.1	54	45	61	52	6.60
Deng	56	54	61	59	60	58	2.00
Gordon	54	59	59	62	58	62	-4.00
Salmons	53.7	54	49	54	55	57	-2.43

The chart leaves a lot out (who plays with who, usage rates) but it gives a general sense of how a single player can affect a team's passing. Looking at the on court vs. off court Team Offensive Ratings the past three years:

Name	ORtgOn09	ORtgOff09	ORtgOn08	ORtgOff08	ORtgOn07	ORtgOff07	AvgDiff
Miller	108.7	105.3	111.1	104.1	108.9	106.3	4.33
Deng	107.5	110.7	107.3	102.7	107.6	101.4	2.53
Gordon	110.2	106.8	105.5	104.7	108	102.2	3.33
Salmons	107.1	105.9	106.5	112	106.6	108.4	-2.03

Gordon is so freakishly talented he seemingly helps the offense despite lowering its AST%. But Miller and Deng may be making up for their lack of talent and athleticism by playing team-first ball. Although it's not like Luol can't do anything on the offensive end...

Luol showed signs of his old self in 2009

I think the tendency is to look at 2009 as a lost season for Luol. It's easy to look at his overall numbers - mainly his .511 TS% and 9.0 AST% - and conclude that he didn't mesh well with Rose. But we forget that he was his old self in January before getting hurt a month later.

Here's Scotter's post reviewing that month. Deng averaged a .568 TS%, 10.5 AST% and 6.4 OREB% - numbers nearly identical to his ones in 2007 - and added a new element to his game: a 21.3 DREB% which topped Noah's and Tyrus's (think how much that would've helped in the Boston series). His raw averages from that month: 17.5ppg, 8.5rpg, 2.3apg on 50.3 FG% (at just 24 years old) remind us why Paxson gave him the big contract.

That said, I don't think Luol's worth $12 million a year. But I also don't think we're helping ourselves by trading him for an expiring contract like Camby's or Shaq's. We bought ourselves a role player for $71 million, but we bought ourselves a damn good one whose game, I think, fits well with Rose, Tyrus, and Noah going forward.

This Bulls Team Next Year Pt 2

YaoPau — Wed, 20 May 2009 16:58:24 -0000

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

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

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

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

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


% of min:	0.90						Exp O:	3.21	Exp D:	2.33
							Actual O	?	Actual D	?

									Exp Net:	5.53

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Analyzing the Plan

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

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

How Good This Bulls Team Is Next Year

YaoPau — Tue, 19 May 2009 18:20:19 -0000

I was anti-Paxson for awhile. His style of acquiring character and experience over talent didn't make sense to me. I looked at the past champions - Jordan, Olajuwon, Kobe, Shaq, Duncan, Pierce, Garnett...and thought "stars win championships... we need a star!"

Then I started learning more about adjusted plusminus - the stat that takes every lineup every player is in each year, the opponents every one of those lineups faced, and the score differential from each shift, allowing smart people with PhDs to separate each player's value from those of his teammates and opponents - and I realized: stars typically win because stars are just really really good.

How good? Kevin Garnett had a +14.47 adjusted plusminus (APM) last year, which means he's 14.47 points better per 100 possessions than an average NBA player. That's more than Shawn Marion (+3.83), Josh Howard (+3.79), Tracy McGrady (+2.85), Joe Johnson (+2.04), Richard Hamilton (+0.93) and Ray Allen (+0.92)... combined. Surround a true superstar with an average team (think LeBron this year), and you automatically put yourself in contention for a title.

But the Nuggets are in the semifinals this year without a superstar. The Rockets without Yao and McGrady took the Lakers to seven games without a superstar. The Pistons won a championship without a superstar. And it's because those teams have/had plenty of rotation players with a positive APM. Each individual player may only be a +1 or +2, but add 'em up and they compete.

There's been a lot of talk about going balls out for Wade or Bosh in 2010. If we get one of them, great. But I think there's an easier way to get back into contention, and it started with the moves Paxson made this past season. Here's a look at the estimated APMs for our Bulls players this year (estimated using EOPM and fundamentallysound's defensive statistical APM).

2008-2009	% of min	TS%	OREB%	AST%	TOV%	USG%	EOPM	Net Effect	EDPM	Net Effect
Gordon	0.75	0.573	2	15.9	11.9	25	2.00	1.50	-2.20	-1.65
Rose	0.75	0.516	3.7	28.8	13.3	22.6	2.11	1.58	-2.49	-1.87
Tyrus	0.55	0.525	7.8	5.5	13.6	19.4	-1.90	-1.05	3.16	1.74
Noah	0.49	0.594	14.5	8.1	15.4	12.3	-0.01	0.00	3.12	1.53
Deng	0.42	0.511	5.5	9	9.6	20	-0.65	-0.28	-0.03	-0.01
Hinrich	0.34	0.551	1.4	22.7	16	18.1	0.29	0.10	-0.13	-0.04
Nocioni	0.32	0.547	3.1	7.4	12.7	20.1	-1.12	-0.36	-0.21	-0.07
Salmons	0.25	0.596	1.9	8.8	9.7	20.2	1.41	0.35	-0.59	-0.15
Gooden	0.23	0.514	10.3	7.7	12.6	21.9	-0.86	-0.20	0.51	0.12
Hughes	0.20	0.525	0.9	11.9	9.5	21.4	-0.07	-0.01	-0.40	-0.08
Miller	0.19	0.574	10.3	18	14.5	19.4	1.91	0.36	0.69	0.13
Thabo	0.18	0.503	4.1	13.1	16.1	14	-3.16	-0.57	0.63	0.11
Gray	0.18	0.508	13.5	9.6	17.2	14.5	-2.72	-0.49	1.33	0.24
Hunter	0.07	0.433	0.9	20.4	18.4	17.3	-4.61	-0.32	-0.96	-0.07
Timmy	0.06	0.531	3.6	7.4	9.2	19.1	-0.59	-0.04	-1.52	-0.09
Simmons	0.02	0.515	7.6	5.4	0	19.8	2.03	0.04	1.19	0.02
Nichols	0.01	0.25	0	34.2	0	35.7	0.51	0.01	-5.40	-0.05
Roberson	0.01	0.353	10	7.7	5.6	34.9	-1.81	-0.02	-5.69	-0.06
Linton	0.01	0.409	8.2	6.9	15.4	13.8	-6.43	-0.06	-1.61	-0.02

							Exp O:	0.55	Exp D:	-0.26
							Actual O	0.10	Actual D	-0.40

									Exp Net:	0.29

By taking each player's Estimated Offensive (EOPM) or Defensive (EDPM) Plus Minus and multiplying it by the % of minutes played, we get each player's net effect to our team per 100 possessions over 82 games. According to EOPM, the Bulls should've been +0.55 points per 100 possessions better offensively than league average. They turned out to be +0.10 better, pretty close. (Note: defensively, fundamentallysounds system already adjusts for team defensive rating, so the expected total will always resemble the actual.)

What you'll notice in the chart, though, is almost every negative player (found by adding EOPM and EDPM) from the 2007-2008 Bulls is gone.

Nocioni (-1.33), Gooden (-0.35), Hughes (-0.47), and Thabo (-2.53) were all shipped out at the deadline, Gordon (-0.20) likely won't be re-signed, and Gray (-1.39), Hunter (-5.57), Roberson (-7.50), and Linton Johnson (-8.04) likely won't be in the rotation next year. Maybe Pax is looking at this APM stuff too?

We have eight rotation players coming back. Adjusting their % of minutes so they add up to 90% instead of the current 65%, and adjusting their USG% so they average 20%, here's our team for next season:

(Edit: The formatting below got screwed up, but it comes out to +4.13 for next season, or around a 50-win team. That's before the final 10% of minutes are accounted for, but it's also before adjusting for improvements from Rose, Tyrus, and Noah. The second half later in the week.)

2008-2009	% of min	TS%	OREB%	AST%	TOV%	USG%	EOPM	Net Effect	EDPM	Net Effect
Rose	0.75	0.516	3.7	28.8	13.3	25	2.43	1.83	-2.49	-1.87
Tyrus	0.60	0.525	7.8	5.5	13.6	20	-1.82	-1.09	3.16	1.90
Noah	0.65	0.594	14.5	8.1	15.4	14	0.22	0.15	3.12	2.03
Deng	0.65	0.511	5.5	9	9.6	22	-0.38	-0.25	-0.03	-0.02
Hinrich	0.50	0.551	1.4	22.7	16	19	0.42	0.21	-0.13	-0.07
Salmons	0.70	0.596	1.9	8.8	9.7	22	1.66	1.16	-0.59	-0.41
Miller	0.45	0.574	10.3	18	14.5	17	1.59	0.71	0.69	0.31
Timmy	0.20	0.531	3.6	7.4	9.2	18	-0.74	-0.15	-1.52	-0.30

% of min:	0.90						Exp O:	2.56	Exp D:	1.57
							Actual O	?	Actual D	?