Are the Bulls back?

[DuckIII]

Our friend Steph Noh takes on this question in an article today:

https://www.sportingnews.com/us/nba/chicago-bulls/news/bulls-back-whats-real-whats-not-chicagos-hot-start/0a08a3faf02dd0285ac51f3a

Excellent article. I haven’t read the link he provided which would appear to dispel the notion that pace has no influence on opposition perimeter shooting late in games. Will have to see if the data and method make sense.

Interesting stuff. Thanks for posting it.

[dougthonus]

Perhaps February being poor makes sense since the LaVine trade just happened and they were trying to work in new pieces.

Just to use another example, Boston the last 5 seasons has consistently been elite at opp. 3P%:

2025-26: 6th
2024-25: 2nd
2023-24: 2nd
2022-23: 6th
2021-22: 1st

And this is with 2 different coaches. At some point, teams missing 3s is not purely about luck. Obviously, the Bulls are not at the pattern above, but I just don't think you can dismiss it completely as dumb luck even though it is true that teams will shoot better.

Sure, but if you give up 28 wide open/open 3s, and teams shoot 25% against you, that is luck, and I thin if you want to dig into this stat, you can do a lot to determine if it is luck or not luck.

[Guy Rodgers fan]

DuckIII said: "Excellent article. I haven’t read the link he provided which would appear to dispel the notion that pace has no influence on opposition perimeter shooting late in games. Will have to see if the data and method make sense."

DuckIII, I read the link. I dont think it makes the point it thinks. It compares three point percentage to pace. But it doesn't distinguish between 4th quarter percentage vs. earlier which is really what the Bulls are after. To me, the Bulls are clearly out-conditioning their opponents, but I'm not sure how to quantify that. One clear example, though, was the Lakers game last season when Giddey hit the half court shot to win it. You could see LeBron and Luka were obviously gassed at the end which led to the Bulls big comeback.

[Red8911]

Perhaps February being poor makes sense since the LaVine trade just happened and they were trying to work in new pieces.

Just to use another example, Boston the last 5 seasons has consistently been elite at opp. 3P%:

2025-26: 6th
2024-25: 2nd
2023-24: 2nd
2022-23: 6th
2021-22: 1st

And this is with 2 different coaches. At some point, teams missing 3s is not purely about luck. Obviously, the Bulls are not at the pattern above, but I just don't think you can dismiss it completely as dumb luck even though it is true that teams will shoot better.

Sure, but if you give up 28 wide open/open 3s, and teams shoot 25% against you, that is luck, and I thin if you want to dig into this stat, you can do a lot to determine if it is luck or not luck.

Last season your excuse that the bulls were winning was that the all the opponents were tanking. Now you change it that the opponents are missing too many shots lol.

Do you not want the bulls to win games ? Seems like your just looking for reasons to hate on them.

[Red Larrivee]

Perhaps February being poor makes sense since the LaVine trade just happened and they were trying to work in new pieces.

Just to use another example, Boston the last 5 seasons has consistently been elite at opp. 3P%:

2025-26: 6th
2024-25: 2nd
2023-24: 2nd
2022-23: 6th
2021-22: 1st

And this is with 2 different coaches. At some point, teams missing 3s is not purely about luck. Obviously, the Bulls are not at the pattern above, but I just don't think you can dismiss it completely as dumb luck even though it is true that teams will shoot better.

Sure, but if you give up 28 wide open/open 3s, and teams shoot 25% against you, that is luck, and I thin if you want to dig into this stat, you can do a lot to determine if it is luck or not luck.

I agree with you. In a single game or a small sample size, luck is a significant factor. But, when there are 85 other games since 2024 with the Bulls having similar success, then that's not really luck.

[Chi town]

I believe pace has a lot to do with opponents 3pt misses. We obviously can’t know how this affects the mind either knowing you will be running and tired as you shoot… do they overcompensate and shoot long misses because they think they are tired?

Would need to dive deeper into who is missing and from where as well.

Are the Bulls intentionally trying to give teams wide open looks as the worst shot profiles… for example we want DDR to shoot from the top of the key because he is a career 30% shooter from there.

Bulls are anticipating the 3pt line and where shooters will be… could it be that direct about desired locations for the most high volume shooters?

[dougthonus]

Last season your excuse that the bulls were winning was that the all the opponents were tanking. Now you change it that the opponents are missing too many shots lol.

Do you not want the bulls to win games ? Seems like your just looking for reasons to hate on them.

That's an inaccurate, pejorative account on anything I've said.

I'm thrilled the Bulls are winning. That is very separate from an analysis of whether the Bulls defense causes a team to shoot 25% on wide open and open threes vs whether there is luck involved.

[dougthonus]

I agree with you. In a single game or a small sample size, luck is a significant factor. But, when there are 85 other games since 2024 with the Bulls having similar success, then that's not really luck.

I'm not saying this is wrong. It might be true.

I'm saying that this stat is incredibly noisy, and you could look at and present stats that are way less noisy, but it would either take a fair amount of work or access to a paid site that I don't use presently (I'm sure some show this).

I do like the idea of looking at how many open / wide open attempts to they give up, but even that can be noisy because maybe you don't care if you give up wide open attempts to bad shooters, so you'd need to dig even further into what defines a quality attempt by trying to decipher how hard it is for the guy shooting the ball.

It'd be a trivial problem to solve for a data scientist with access to the data, but as presented, the data is so superficial and prone to variance that I don't believe it says anything meaningful. It could be true that this data says nothing meaningful AND the real good data which is meaningful both say the exact same thing (ie, the Bulls could truly have great three point defense) but it might also be true that some analysis of this shows it is primarily luck.

Presently teams are shooting 9% under their season average from 3 against the Bulls if I'm reading the NBA's data correctly. I don't see a way to easily drill into the shot quality the Bulls are allowing vs other teams with public data, but I'd wager it's mostly luck, but who knows.

[GoBlue72391]

Last season your excuse that the bulls were winning was that the all the opponents were tanking. Now you change it that the opponents are missing too many shots lol.

Do you not want the bulls to win games ? Seems like your just looking for reasons to hate on them.

That's an inaccurate, pejorative account on anything I've said.

I'm thrilled the Bulls are winning. That is very separate from an analysis of whether the Bulls defense causes a team to shoot 25% on wide open and open threes vs whether there is luck involved.

It annoys me how some people take analysis and level headedness as pessimism. No one in particular, it's very common.

[Chi town]

I’m calling it…

5-0 win against the Knicks
Knicks loss
Sixers Win
Bucks Loss (will get them later in the season)
CLE win
Spurs Loss

7-3 with Coby coming back would be a strong start.

[GoBlue72391]

I’m calling it…

5-0 win against the Knicks
Knicks loss
Sixers Win
Bucks Loss (will get them later in the season)
CLE win
Spurs Loss

7-3 with Coby coming back would be a strong start.

My gut is telling me we're gonna go 8-2 for some reason. I'll probably be wrong, but that's what I'm feeling.

[coldfish]

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/shots-closest-defender?dir=D&sort=FG2_PCT

Some stats:
very tight defense (0-2ft) 2p 12/26 (11th) 0/0 3p
tight defense (2-4ft) 2p 93/162 (26th) 1/10 (2nd) 3p
open (3-6ft) 2p 30/58 (6th) 3p 10/36 (5th)
wide open (6ft+) 2p 6/10 (8th) 17/62 (1st)

The one that everyone is pointing out is the very last one. Chicago is 1st in 3p defense against wide open 3's. That said, they have given up the LEAST wide open 3 pointers in the NBA. For some reason, people are forgetting to point that out. The median team has surrendered 50% more wide open 3's than the Bulls.

The median shooting percentage on wide open 3's is 39%. The Bulls are giving up 27.4%. If opponents would have shot the league median percentage on those 64 shots the Bulls would have given up 25 made 3 pointers instead of 17. 24 total points (minus any Oreb that they got on the misses). 6 per game.

[GoBlue72391]

https://www.nba.com/stats/teams/shots-closest-defender?dir=D&sort=FG2_PCT

Some stats:
very tight defense (0-2ft) 2p 12/26 (11th) 0/0 3p
tight defense (2-4ft) 2p 93/162 (26th) 1/10 (2nd) 3p
open (3-6ft) 2p 30/58 (6th) 3p 10/36 (5th)
wide open (6ft+) 2p 6/10 (8th) 17/62 (1st)

The one that everyone is pointing out is the very last one. Chicago is 1st in 3p defense against wide open 3's. That said, they have given up the LEAST wide open 3 pointers in the NBA. For some reason, people are forgetting to point that out. The median team has surrendered 50% more wide open 3's than the Bulls.

The median shooting percentage on wide open 3's is 39%. The Bulls are giving up 27.4%. If opponents would have shot the league median percentage on those 64 shots the Bulls would have given up 25 made 3 pointers instead of 17. 24 total points (minus any Oreb that they got on the misses). 6 per game.

So we would be 2-2 rather than 4-0 in this hypothetical where everything else is exactly the same except our opponent's percentage on wide open 3s.

[2weekswithpay]

5 games in, ESPN net points says that 3pt shooting is the biggest advantage the Bulls have had. +6.5 net points from 3s, and it was +8 before the Knicks game. As of now, the team is performing well enough in other areas to win games without the advantage in 3pt shooting.