Image ImageImage Image

Mike Dunleavy Jr

Moderators: HomoSapien, Payt10, RedBulls23, coldfish, AshyLarrysDiaper, fleet, kulaz3000, Michael Jackson, Ice Man, dougthonus, Tommy Udo 6 , DASMACKDOWN, GimmeDat

DanTown8587
RealGM
Posts: 37,583
And1: 9,332
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Location: Chicago
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#81 » by DanTown8587 » Sun Mar 1, 2015 11:28 pm

Rerisen wrote:Just think about the Spurs last year. Macro Belinelli was a more efficient and well rounded offensive player than Mike, and Pop still pretty much buried him in the Finals as not good enough.

We don't know if Snell is for real yet, but we should really hope he is and try to do everything in our power to promote him to be. Because if you are modeling a depth team to try and win the title, Tony as a player that can shoot threes, defend multiple positions, pump and drive past a closing defender to score on him own, or make a pass, fits the Spurs versatile depth model potentially far more than a singular spot up guy like Dunleavy.

I guess if one is in the camp that the Bulls had the most talented team in the NBA to start the season, and somehow see that Derrick Rose has played at a high enough level to justify this belief, then maybe your position is more of a "Don't rock the boat" with the rotation and just everyone does their job and the Bulls win the championship.

I don't really see the talent on this team to that level, certainly not with where Rose has been this year or looks likely to end up, esp now with this new surgery. As such the Bulls need to find new and unlooked for areas of production and talent to reach that end goal. I hoped that might be trade, now I hope its via internal growth.


Tony Snell doesn't shoot well off a screen if he's still moving nor does he do it on a high volume so now playing him with Rose, Butler, and the two bigs creates a problem because no one is screening away from the ball and forcing attention away from the ball. Right now if Mike starts on the right wing and gets a screen near the rim by a big, the other team is going to be aware of this action and stay with it and have their big man take a step with Mike; if it's Tony then they now are going to trail Tony and call that sufficient defense and the screener's defender doesn't have to get involved. That's a HUGE difference in the styles of the two guys. While Tony is more likely to take a dribble and go to the rim, he's not going to go against most teams starting front lines, dribble 20 feet and finish over length like say a DeAndre Jordan or Tim Mozgov even, especially when you consider there isn't a ton of space to do that playing next to seven footers who like to play close to the rim.

If I have Rose, Butler, and Gasol on the floor, I want active cutters + floor spacers + guys who finish off screens next to them. Noah hurts a lot of this because he's not a spacer and he's only ok at cutting, but Dunleavy does all those things well.

I mean complaining about Dunleavy with the starters is almost hysterical.
...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#82 » by Rerisen » Sun Mar 1, 2015 11:41 pm

DanTown8587 wrote:Tony Snell doesn't shoot well off a screen if he's still moving nor does he do it on a high volume so now playing him with Rose, Butler, and the two bigs creates a problem because no one is screening away from the ball and forcing attention away from the ball. Right now if Mike starts on the right wing and gets a screen near the rim by a big, the other team is going to be aware of this action and stay with it and have their big man take a step with Mike; if it's Tony then they now are going to trail Tony and call that sufficient defense and the screener's defender doesn't have to get involved. That's a HUGE difference in the styles of the two guys. While Tony is more likely to take a dribble and go to the rim, he's not going to go against most teams starting front lines, dribble 20 feet and finish over length like say a DeAndre Jordan or Tim Mozgov even, especially when you consider there isn't a ton of space to do that playing next to seven footers who like to play close to the rim.

If I have Rose, Butler, and Gasol on the floor, I want active cutters + floor spacers + guys who finish off screens next to them. Noah hurts a lot of this because he's not a spacer and he's only ok at cutting, but Dunleavy does all those things well.

I mean complaining about Dunleavy with the starters is almost hysterical.


Glad its just 'almost'. But yet you don't trust Dunleavy finishing despite how much you claim he helps. Somehow Snell makes more sense then.

The Bulls don't make a lot of hay on Dunleavy getting screens off ball that was Korver. And Snell is still a good enough shooter, esp lately, that teams are going to track him just as hard running across the floor.

They aren't going to look at his PPP, mostly created when he stunk anyway, and say we have to guard him on spot ups but not chase him through screens.

Dunleavy is a sub average starter for a wannabe title team, esp when you don't have a mega scorers up top like a Shaq/Kobe, Russ/KD. Pretending he is some perfect fit, acceptable all around talent guy, is baffling.

He's an ideal bench player for 20 minutes a night. Just till now we haven't had a better player. But now we might.

Crissake the guy just went 3 of the last 4 games scoring 7 points on 70 minutes but people still want to drone on about spacing as if that is all the matters. We've had his spacing all year, might want to check Rose and Gasol's efficiency and see how mediocre, if not lacking, they are vs other elite teams top scorers with all that spacing supposedly helping them. While your at, be sure to check the team's efficiency too, its middle of the pack.

But by all means, let's not touch anything. Plan the parade.

This team and rotation as is was built to win with Derrick Rose at a super high level. He's not at that level, its time to try and squeeze out help anywhere else that we might, because he is going to need help carrying this team to the promise land. Mike Dunleavy is not the guy that is going to step up and contribute out of role, in anything but shooting open shots. Players like Snell and Niko might.
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#83 » by Rerisen » Sun Mar 1, 2015 11:52 pm

J. Butler | M. Dunleavy | P. Gasol | J. Noah | D. Rose = +3.5 Pts

J. Butler | P. Gasol | J. Noah | D. Rose | T. Snell = +10.6

Well look at that, Snell in the lineup with the starters is 3 times better than Dunleavy.

I'm sure someone will want to complain about sample size but its 327 minutes to 121 minutes, not that small. Our 1st and 4th most played lineups. It's sure as heck enough that this team should be asking, "Hey, can we get this production all the time out of this group?" And indeed seeing if they can.
User avatar
Fastbrk4brkfast
General Manager
Posts: 7,937
And1: 2,742
Joined: Oct 16, 2010
     

 

Post#84 » by Fastbrk4brkfast » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:07 am

In general it's best to give a player around 10 games to evaluate performance post-injury. But still, if a legit Afflalo deal was on the table it'd be tragic if the Bulls didn't take it because they overvalue Mike.

Starting Tony over MDJ would seem to make sense right now when Mikes readjusting and Tony's playing the best he's ever played.
DanTown8587
RealGM
Posts: 37,583
And1: 9,332
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Location: Chicago
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#85 » by DanTown8587 » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:15 am

Rerisen wrote:J. Butler | M. Dunleavy | P. Gasol | J. Noah | D. Rose = +3.5 Pts

J. Butler | P. Gasol | J. Noah | D. Rose | T. Snell = +10.6

Well look at that, Snell in the lineup with the starters is 3 times better than Dunleavy.

I'm sure someone will want to complain about sample size but its 327 minutes to 121 minutes, not that small. Our 1st and 4th most played lineups. It's sure as heck enough that this team should be asking, "Hey, can we get this production all the time out of this group?" And indeed seeing if they can.


Dunleavy's numbers
.395 FG%
.378 3pt%
9.6 shots per 36

Snell's numbers
.538 FG%
.550 3pt% (11/20)
11.6 shots per 36

Yeah, that massive outlying three point sample might be an issue here in judging the two players. If you had Snell shooting his percentage otherwise (about 35%) so hat's an extra four threes he's made meaning their +24 in 121 minutes would be something like +13 (take four misses away, give them one offensive rebound on those four and then about 1 point per possession) over 235 possessions or about +5.5 per 100.
...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#86 » by Rerisen » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:22 am

^Which would still be superior. The Bulls don't have much to lose here, you know what you have with Mike, he's decent. But putting him on the bench to still get 20 or 25 a night is not going to destroy anything other than Thibs stubborn nature, and it might just pay off big time.

Additionally, how do we know Snell is a 35% 3pt shooter anymore?

He's an entirely different player than the one we've seen the first year and a half.

Not thinking he will shoot over 50% all the time, but he might shoot up near 40%.
DanTown8587
RealGM
Posts: 37,583
And1: 9,332
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Location: Chicago
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#87 » by DanTown8587 » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:22 am

The sad part of Snell's explosion is that it's not even that high a volume when you consider the injuries to the rest of the team; he's had a usage of about 15.6 since the DNP-CD in Houston but it helps that his TS% has been .747 and now people think there's something there that isn't really going to maintain itself.

Dunleavy's usage pre-injury: 13.6%.
Dunleavy's usage post injury: 15.5%

But whatever arguments people want to use, go nuts. Tony Snell simply isn't a more volume scorer than Mike Dunleavy; Tony is just on a flat out earth scorching shooting streak.

Tony Snell pre DNP-CD in Houston 3pt shooting: 77 / 244 = .316%
Tony Snell post DNP-CD in Houston 3pt shooting: 27 / 51 = .529%

That's literally like going from Rajon Rondo's career shooting threes to Kyle Korver's BEST year ever.
...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#88 » by Rerisen » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:25 am

DanTown8587 wrote:The sad part of Snell's explosion is that it's not even that high a volume when you consider the injuries; he's had a usage of about 15.6 but it helps that his TS% has been .747 and now people think there's something there.

Dunleavy's usage pre-injury: 13.6%.


We aren't going to need the volume every night. It would probably settle in to him averaging a couple more points than Mike, but its that he's less streaky owing to not being so one-dimensional and able to impact the game more organically without so much reliance on others playmaking.

It's not like that is a negative you lose with using Snell either, if players are doing a good job creating shots, Tony is now showing every sign that he too can knock them down at a high level.
DanTown8587
RealGM
Posts: 37,583
And1: 9,332
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Location: Chicago
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#89 » by DanTown8587 » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:30 am

Rerisen wrote:
DanTown8587 wrote:The sad part of Snell's explosion is that it's not even that high a volume when you consider the injuries; he's had a usage of about 15.6 but it helps that his TS% has been .747 and now people think there's something there.

Dunleavy's usage pre-injury: 13.6%.


We aren't going to need the volume every night. It would probably settle in to him averaging a couple more points than Mike, but its that he's less streaky owing to not being so one-dimensional and able to impact the game more organically without so much reliance on others playmaking.

It's not like that is a negative you lose with using Snell either, if players are doing a good job creating shots, Tony is now showing every sign that he too can knock them down at a high level.


There simply is no difference in volume between Dunleavy and Snell. The difference between the two is Snell is shooting like Korver's best the past three weeks. If Snell's that good a shooter, then yes he should get minutes over Dunleavy. I'm just highly skeptical of taking the past three weeks and giving him a ton of minutes. I still think Mike's the better all around player all things being equal.
...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#90 » by Rerisen » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:37 am

DanTown8587 wrote:I still think Mike's the better all around player all things being equal.


If Snell is even close to the player he's been the last 11 games or so, which is definitely a different player than he was, I think he is. And he's not just hitting more threes, he's defending better, he's playing smarter, obviously with a new comfort level, he's showing awareness in attacking at good times, cutting off ball attentively, etc.

But to me its not even about who is better right now so much. What its more about is the way Derrick's played this year, the team simply isn't good enough as is. No matter if Mike plays his role to a T, it won't be enough.

I can't say for sure this is the real Tony Snell, but I would keep giving him more leash until he chokes to find out if he really is/could be the better player. Because if he is, you are only going to need that much less from a Derrick Rose that looks like a real long shot to make it to any % that most people would have set for him at the beginning of the year for the Bulls to win it all.

Most probably would have said you need Derrick at 80% at least. Well he's been maybe at 65 or 70%, probably being generous.

And if Derrick was at 90%, I might agree, let's just ride it out and hope everything in place is enough.

But with our reality, instead of only praying on Derrick to get us the rest of the way there, I think we should be exploring whatever other upsides we have in case he doesn't get there.

And the way this team has started games this year, with a pretty mopey starting crew, it should extend to even potential changes there.

We might not even be dealing with the same Dunleavy post injury either. He's been pretty bad in 5 out of 7 games since back.
DanTown8587
RealGM
Posts: 37,583
And1: 9,332
Joined: Jan 06, 2008
Location: Chicago
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#91 » by DanTown8587 » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:50 am

Rerisen wrote:
DanTown8587 wrote:I still think Mike's the better all around player all things being equal.


If Snell is even close to the player he's been the last 11 games or so, which is definitely a different player than he was, I think he is. And he's not just hitting more threes, he's defending better, he's playing smarter, obviously with a new comfort level, he's showing awareness in attacking at good times, cutting off ball attentively, etc.

But to me its not even about who is better right now so much. What its more about is the way Derrick's played this year, the team simply isn't good enough as is. No matter if Mike plays his role to a T, it won't be enough.

I can't say for sure this is the real Tony Snell, but I would keep giving him more leash until he chokes to find out if he really is/could be the better player. Because if he is, you are only going to need that much less from a Derrick Rose that looks like a real long shot to make it to any % that most people would have set for him at the beginning of the year for the Bulls to win it all.

Most probably would have said you need Derrick at 80% at least. Well he's been maybe at 65 or 70%, probably being generous.

And if Derrick was at 90%, I might agree, let's just ride it out and hope everything in place is enough.

But with our reality, instead of only praying on Derrick to get us the rest of the way there, I think we should be exploring whatever other upsides we have in case he doesn't get there.

And the way this team has started games this year, with a pretty mopey starting crew, it should extend to even potential changes there.

We might not even be dealing with the same Dunleavy post injury either. He's been pretty bad in 5 out of 7 games since back.


You think there's a difference between Dunleavy v Snell in terms of getting points with the starters and I don't buy it. You can put Derrick at whatever percentage you want, the volume of shots will not change and they simply aren't that different. I think Mike makes more sense with the starters and Tony makes more sense with the reserves. I have no problem closing out games with either guy. I also think it makes more sense to have a 34 year old Dunleavy give you most of his minutes right after stretching/getting loose than having him sit and come off the bench.
...
User avatar
Rerisen
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 105,369
And1: 25,052
Joined: Nov 23, 2003

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#92 » by Rerisen » Mon Mar 2, 2015 12:57 am

DanTown8587 wrote:You think there's a difference between Dunleavy v Snell in terms of getting points with the starters and I don't buy it. You can put Derrick at whatever percentage you want, the volume of shots will not change and they simply aren't that different.


Derrick is always going to be a volume scorer but I don't buy that he's totally inflexible to what is going on around him.

Let's look at a couple more stats that deal with common arguments made this year relating to what has now become the Snell issue.

1. Tony Snell led the entire team in plus/minus in February at +10.1 per 36.

So he was not just 'taking shots from other players' and not helping the team as has been often derided of a player potentially scoring more here.

2. Derrick Rose averaged the lowest FGA/36 of any month of the season in February.

Is this just a coincidence to happen in the same month Tony's minutes ramped up to 30?

We can't know for sure, but its a trend I would certainly keep the conditions up for that caused it to arise. Because I don't buy into the hand wave dismissal that Rose is simply some mad bomber that is going to hoist up X shots regardless what the team is doing around him. He will always be a big volume scorer for us, that's his role, but small changes around the edges, yes that's possible.

And right now, Rose shooting less and having less playmaking burden only makes this team better. Because he has been carrying a load equal to 2011 so far, and he is nowhere close to pulling it off.

Also I should add as a sidenote, this really doesn't need to be some big powwow over the term volume scorer, that people seem hung up on from some old baggage discussion. Just play the players playing the best, its about performance as Thibs says, its that simple at the end of the day. To that end, some of Snell's minutes should be coming from Hinrich's even.
errisal
Head Coach
Posts: 7,107
And1: 406
Joined: Oct 01, 2001
Location: EngleWood - Where Rose does nada
         

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#93 » by errisal » Mon Mar 2, 2015 1:40 am

Rerisen wrote:
DanTown8587 wrote:You think there's a difference between Dunleavy v Snell in terms of getting points with the starters and I don't buy it. You can put Derrick at whatever percentage you want, the volume of shots will not change and they simply aren't that different.


Derrick is always going to be a volume scorer but I don't buy that he's totally inflexible to what is going on around him.

Let's look at a couple more stats that deal with common arguments made this year relating to what has now become the Snell issue.

1. Tony Snell led the entire team in plus/minus in February at +10.1 per 36.

So he was not just 'taking shots from other players' and not helping the team as has been often derided of a player potentially scoring more here.

2. Derrick Rose averaged the lowest FGA/36 of any month of the season in February.

Is this just a coincidence to happen in the same month Tony's minutes ramped up to 30?

We can't know for sure, but its a trend I would certainly keep the conditions up for that caused it to arise. Because I don't buy into the hand wave dismissal that Rose is simply some mad bomber that is going to hoist up X shots regardless what the team is doing around him. He will always be a big volume scorer for us, that's his role, but small changes around the edges, yes that's possible.

And right now, Rose shooting less and having less playmaking burden only makes this team better. Because he has been carrying a load equal to 2011 so far, and he is nowhere close to pulling it off.

Also I should add as a sidenote, this really doesn't need to be some big powwow over the term volume scorer, that people seem hung up on from some old baggage discussion. Just play the players playing the best, its about performance as Thibs says, its that simple at the end of the day. To that end, some of Snell's minutes should be coming from Hinrich's even.


Why is it always about the scoring when it comes to talking about this. It is obviously clear that Dunleavy doesn't have the athleticsm needed against the more athletic teams. What's been going on with Dunleavy after the injury is something that was sporadically happening prior to the injury. As I've stated before, he has had way too many useless performances for a starting SF. Tony Snell is not only shooting it better right now but he clearly is more effective than Dunleavy in guarding the more athletic players in this league. Both Mike and Kirk need to have their minutes cut drastically and Thibs needs to find out right now about McDermott and whether or not Moore can give you steadier minutes.
"The Cubs will Win a World Series title in my Lifetime! I plan to live to the age of 150 and the Cubs Win it in 2017! :nod: "
WindyCityBorn
RealGM
Posts: 20,371
And1: 10,762
Joined: Jun 26, 2014
     

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#94 » by WindyCityBorn » Mon Mar 2, 2015 6:21 am

Kirk is garbage and Dunleavy should be very close to getting benched in favor of Snell. Thibs is so so afraid of change I don't expect anything to happen until it is too late.
Ice Man
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 24,766
And1: 13,413
Joined: Apr 19, 2011

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#95 » by Ice Man » Mon Mar 2, 2015 1:02 pm

Rerisen wrote:What its more about is the way Derrick's played this year, the team simply isn't good enough as is. No matter if Mike plays his role to a T, it won't be enough.


Our two upsides (aside from Derrick) are Snell & Niko. Good news was they looked like it yesterday. We know about the team's bad news, however.
ralphisBullsFan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,296
And1: 430
Joined: Dec 14, 2013

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#96 » by ralphisBullsFan » Mon Mar 2, 2015 1:12 pm

Snell is our future...might as well start him now and finish the 4th with him unless MDJ is having a good shooting night....even if tony is having a bad shooting night he can still slash to the basketball and is a quicker, younger defender....now we will see how well tony plays against 2's unless mr. intangibles starts at the 2 and brooks the 1...my god at the prospect of that starting 5.... brooks,kirk, MDJ, noah, gasol.....slow but old; big but small....
Ice Man
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 24,766
And1: 13,413
Joined: Apr 19, 2011

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#97 » by Ice Man » Mon Mar 2, 2015 1:24 pm

ralphisBullsFan wrote:my god at the prospect of that starting 5.... brooks,kirk, MDJ, noah, gasol


A collective 165 years old, and playing every minute like it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see GarPax re-sign MDJ. GarPax LOVES old. I refuse to believe that any team besides the Bulls would have offered Kirk a 2-year no-trade deal.
ralphisBullsFan
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,296
And1: 430
Joined: Dec 14, 2013

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#98 » by ralphisBullsFan » Mon Mar 2, 2015 2:11 pm

Ice Man wrote:
ralphisBullsFan wrote:my god at the prospect of that starting 5.... brooks,kirk, MDJ, noah, gasol


A collective 165 years old, and playing every minute like it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see GarPax re-sign MDJ. GarPax LOVES old. I refuse to believe that any team besides the Bulls would have offered Kirk a 2-year no-trade deal.


maybe if you sign 2 slow white guys in their mid 30's for more than the league min you get some sort of cap relief....
Ice Man
Forum Mod - Bulls
Forum Mod - Bulls
Posts: 24,766
And1: 13,413
Joined: Apr 19, 2011

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#99 » by Ice Man » Mon Mar 2, 2015 4:29 pm

ralphisBullsFan wrote:maybe if you sign 2 slow white guys in their mid 30's for more than the league min you get some sort of cap relief....


We're at 3 with Pau, Kirk, and Mike. That should qualify for financial aid from the league office.
TheStig
RealGM
Posts: 14,690
And1: 3,897
Joined: Jun 18, 2004
Location: Get rid of GarPaxDorf

Re: Mike Dunleavy Jr 

Post#100 » by TheStig » Mon Mar 2, 2015 5:00 pm

ralphisBullsFan wrote:
Ice Man wrote:
ralphisBullsFan wrote:my god at the prospect of that starting 5.... brooks,kirk, MDJ, noah, gasol


A collective 165 years old, and playing every minute like it.

I wouldn't be surprised to see GarPax re-sign MDJ. GarPax LOVES old. I refuse to believe that any team besides the Bulls would have offered Kirk a 2-year no-trade deal.


maybe if you sign 2 slow white guys in their mid 30's for more than the league min you get some sort of cap relief....

Their minimum is higher but subsidized by the league. Like Nazr's deal.

When a player has been in the NBA for three or more seasons, and is playing under a one-year, 10-day or Rest-of-Season contract at the minimum salary, the league reimburses the team for part of his salary -- any amount above the minimum salary level for a two-year veteran. For example, in 2011-12 the minimum salary for a two-year veteran was $854,389, so for a ten-year veteran, with a minimum salary of $1,352,181, the league would reimburse the team $497,792. Only the two-year minimum salary is included in the team salary, not the player's full salary. They do this so teams won't shy away from signing older veterans simply because they are more expensive than younger veterans.

Return to Chicago Bulls