Bulls Off-Season Review/Season Preview

The Bulls key needs last season were a big guard who could command minutes, post scoring, scoring off the bench, and generally height.</p>

PJ Brown was the bulls tallest player last season at 6'11" but he played like he was 5'11" - it was rare that he would jump at all. He literally had layups blocked by the bottom of the rim and generally looked like a very old man. I'm sorry to say this about him, because he's a genuine good guy in the NBA and was formerly a very very good player. Maybe he'll be a good 10 minute/game guy on a team with lots of other bigs, but on the Bulls he simply had to play the important and bigger minutes than he's fit for. </p>

Once you got beyond him, the bulls played 6'3" Hinrich, 6' Gordon, 6'7" Wallace, and 6'9" Deng. Hinrich at PG had decent size, and Deng at SF, too. But as a team, that's a very very small team. </p>

They got beat like a rug by Detroit because Detroit was very deep with big men who were mobile, able to post up and score, and able to go to the perimeter and score. When their bigs hit outside, it drew Wallace and/or Brown out of their comfort zone on defense, leaving the remaining Bulls too small to effectively rebound or defend. The tiny guard lineup was also exploited by numerous teams over the season.</p>

Thabo is an effective SF, but hasn't shown he's a good ballhandler to play the guard positions for extended periods. He rebounds extremely well, no matter what position he was put at, though, and was effective in short spurts as a Kobe/LeBron kind of "stopper" (as if those guys could fully be stopped -- NOT!). His offensive game was erratic, at best. Given the team's need for taller players, he surely would have found more minutes if he were capable.</p>

The team only addressed some of its needs in the offseason, which leads me to believe they're going to have trouble in the playoffs again. </p>

Whether they play Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Wallace, and Thomas or Hinrich, Gordon, Deng, Wallace, and Noah, they're effectively a 3-on-5 team on offense. This makes the late addition of Joe Smith all the more important. He's a significant upgrade over Brown and he's got some offensive game. They're closer to 4-on-5 on offense, though they may suffer some on the defensive end. Defensive players are not what the Bulls lack tho. Smith's 2-year contract and his ability to still play pretty well (see his last couple of months last season) are a clear signal that the Bulls will play him a good number of minutes, allowing Thomas to develop more and to not have to throw Noah's feet to the fire for big minutes right off the bat. </p>

They failed to get a post scorer, but did generally improve the team's height and addressed their lack of bench scoring (Curry). I am satisfied that Noah is NBA ready and will be an effective player. He may lack a scorer's mentality or offensive game, but he does have a very good basketball IQ, and you can't teach height. He does fit in with the Bulls' style of play, which is defense first. Thomas is a guy without a position. Raw athletic ability, and he is one of the quickest guys to get up off his feet to block a shot or get a rebound. His offense consists entirely of putback dunks, breakaway dunks, and alley oops. I question his basketball IQ, and he is a major project. He does make good things happen because teams don't know what to do about him. That would change if he got more minutes.</p>

The Bulls let Malik Allen go as a FA after losing Pargo in a similar manner the year before. Gradually, the Bulls' bench players who had a reasonable offensive game are being replaced with defensive-minded but offensively challenged guys (Noah, Thomas, Thabo). It's not that these guys were great, they're just better than what we're left with. This will become obvious in games where the Bulls need offense off the bench, are losing by 10 points and need that offense, when the starters who can score (which isn't all of them!) are in foul trouble, injuries, etc. At some point, Skiles is going to be looking at his bench for scoring and have to throw another defender out there to try and gain on the scoreboard. </p>

I'm certain that Skiles' record as coach of the Bulls is still sub .500, though they had only one losing season in his tenure. I'm not convinced that other coaches might have had the same record or better. Simply put, adding Deng, Gordon, Duhon, and Nocioni to any team is going to make the coach look good! He's failed to develop or properly use any big men (Curry/Chandler both went on to superior performances elsewhere), and I'm not sure the players really like him.</p>

Offensively, the Bulls rely on ball posession and minimizing turnovers. Hinrich is generally the primary ballhandler, and he's "praised" (which I find stupid) for the way he keeps his dribble. Keeping his dribble means his teammates don't touch the ball. I feel his assist numbers are low, considering he has Nocioni, Deng, and Gordon who put up double digit scoring and are quite effective. His assist numbers may be higher than they should be, as well, because you're bound to get 6 assists a game if you dominate the ball and finally get it to Deng or Gordon for a shot with 6 seconds left on the clock. </p>

The offensive sets feature Hinrich and a big doing pick and roll or pick and pop kinds of plays, or Hinrich using the picks to drive the lane and kick to the corners where one of Deng or Gordon stand for most of the shot clock. </p>

Deng is absolutely superb as he has a near automatic mid-range jumper and the knack of slashing to the hoop (manufatured play) and has a wide array of ways he scores from up close. Gordon is simply one of the best pure shooters in the league and is lightning quick. He has something that few players have, which is that you put the ball in his hands and he scores. And he scores a lot. </p>

One of the Bulls' plays is to get him the ball on the wing and have him drive into a triple team, across the lane, bringing his man to Hinrich's and the guy defending the big setting the pick for Hinrich. I wish they'd eliminate that play from the playbook, but they are intent on running it many times every game. </p>

The Bulls offense is one that is played on the floor. The guards can dunk, but don't. The bigs are effective dunkers, but they're used to hit mid-range jumpers on the pick and pop plays. </p>

There also seems to be an organizational aversion to having one of the players turn into a superstar. Whether it's a focus on TEAM over TALENT or simply that they don't want to pay superstar type salaries over the course of their careers (I think it's both), they simply don't do it.</p>

Overall, the Bulls remind me of a top-notch golfer. They play their game and capitalize on the opponents falling short somewhere along the line. They're built to win games in the regular season, but I still see them falling short in the playoffs. Playoff teams get the chance to watch lots of game film, and then play against you and then watch game film of that. They find the explots and take advantage of them, and the Bulls simply can be exploited by posting up the guards or bringing the bigs to the perimeter and by simply standing a defender in each corner who stay home.</p>