Are people too hard on Billy Donovan?

[Red Larrivee]

You don't notice the disparity there? The problem isn't the lack of championships. It's the inability to even get the team into the playoffs. You can downplay the talent that was on the team all you want. It doesn't matter. You don't get re-upped twice in the NBA for not making the playoffs season after season. That is a failure. Unless you are Billy Donovan and the front office is the Chicago Bulls.

We are in a situation where the coach is viewed a lot more favorably than the GM. I can't think of another team in the same boat. The Bulls are that couple in the streets where everyone looks and wonders "Damn, how did he get her?"

Donovan could easily land another NBA HC job. The Knicks wanted him. Or, he could have a number of major college programs lining up to sign a blank check. He's in a fantastic position.

AK won't land another GM job at this rate.

The failure is clearly on the front office. I'm sure they know that. These teams had no business even sniffing play-in. And if they fire Donovan, they're sticking their neck out and saying that they've built solid playoff teams, they didn't get there, and it's Donovan's fault. And we all know that's not true.

So here we are.

[Stratmaster]

I think *this* is the most one-sided portrayal of the talent on this team I have ever seen.

First and foremost, as League Circles pointed out, this recitation totally ignores roster construction and just looks at players in isolation. When you saw how the team utterly fell apart without Lonzo, it tells you all you need to know about how good the roster construction is.

As to the individual players:

Zach Lavine is a very efficient scorer who brings absolutely nothing else to the floor.

DeRozan had some nice individual season here, but is also a zero on defense. Does not space the floor and isn't a great fit for the modern NBA. (Seems like a great dude, though).

Vooch - he's terrible, this whole board knows he's terrible, and stuff like "double double machine" is said to paper over the fact that the guy sucks. Weirdly, you indicated his stock dropped last season, but last season was his only arguably decent one, given how well he shot the three. But you cannot have a player like Vooch when you have perimeter defenders like Lavine, DeRozan, and White.

White - another one-dimensional scoring player.

Pat - was not given enough of a role and missed so much time with injury that I think it's pretty nuts to think that he's had a huge impact on wins and losses. I agree he's bad, though!

I have no idea how/why you would think that the team's roster construction has been a function of Billy. There is no evidence for this.

In any event, the Bulls have had a bunch of guys that would have their uses in the NBA in theory, but you can't have Coby + LaVine + DeRozan on the same team and think that's going to work out. Heck, if LaVine and DeRozan are so great, why does Sacramento suck? I guess they must just have terrible coaching, too.

I gave the pros and cons of the players. I was responding to a post that portrayed 3 all-stars as trash without citing a single positive. But mine is the one-sided one. Sure. Whatever you say. And if you think Billy wasn't consulted as to the types of players he wanted, you are being foolish. Or...maybe that's why they keep extending him. Because he is a weak mealy-mouthed simp who won't speak out for himself.

Well, it’s disingenuous to call Vooch an All-Star. He’s never made an All-Star team here. His contributions to Orlando, which were limited to putting up big numbers on bad teams, aren’t really relevant to his quality as a Bull.


I have no idea how much Billy was “consulted” about acquisitions, but NBA coaches typically have way less say-so on personnel than in, say, football. I have no particular reason to believe that Billy has had a lot of influence on free agent acquisitions, trades, and the draft.

The thing you didn’t respond to that is pretty telling is that Zach and DeMar now exist on the same team, and have a better third wheel than Vooch in Sabonis, and yet the team still sucks. These guys may have positive attributes, but a team built around them is not likely to be good.

In any event, I know nobody is ever going to convince you that Billy is good, despite the fact that he consistently drags this bad roster to better-than-expected results.

Vuc came to Billy Donovan off all-star credentials. that isn't relevant to how Billy may have affected the performance of his players? And Demar and Zach have existed in Sac for less than half a season. I'll bet you a pizza that Sac has a better record, playing against tougher competition, than the Bulls this season.

But again. I keep stating facts. You and others don't respond to any of them. You just keep making excuses for Billy. And then have the ironic gall to think you are somehow "calling me out" because I didn't respond to comments about the Kings. Is Billy coaching the Kings? Nope. Just "whataboutism". And in no way, in overall performance since Billy came here, have the Bulls outperformed expectations. Are you saying your expectations when Billy got here were that the Bulls would get to 1 playoff series in 5 seasons? And if I had told you that the day after he was hired, and also told you that he would get 2 extensions for that effort, what would your response have been?

I get it. Billy is a likeable guy. A great college coach. He makes you want to like him. But he is a poor NBA coach. He will be fine for the next couple seasons because the Bulls will be more like a college team anyway. I have already come to terms with that and it is fine. But don't act like he has shown anything in Chicago that would indicate he is a good head coach in the NBA

[League Circles]

OK. Let's try this a different way, since that is the most one-sided portrayal of the talent on this team I have ever seen.

Lavine: Multiple season all-star. Paid exactly what every other player in the league like him would have been. One of the most prolific and efficient scorers in the league. Scores from all levels and in the open court. Never been on a winning team, except for 1/2 season in Chicago, at which point the Bulls had the best record in the league and he was in MVP discussions along with Derozan. Great on-ball defense. Bad team defense. Who had trouble figuring out how to use a player with every scoring talent you could possibly ask for in a basketball player? Billy.
Derozan: Multiple season all-star. Another prolific, highly efficient scorer. Known as "Mr. Clutch", wasn't he? Multiple season all-star. Ball stopper. Shrank the floor. Who committed, in every meaningful situation, to giving him the ball to stop it and shrink the floor? Billy.
Vucevic: Multiple season all-star. Double-double machine, near the top of the league every season. Widely considered a top 10-15 Center in the league until, probably, last season. Prone to whining and disappearing if the offense wasn't centered (pun intended) around him. Who conceded to his demands, and preached for 3 seasons that the ball has to go through the middle? Well, yeah. Stacey King. But also, Billy.
White: The new "Vinny the microwave". The 4th guy on the team capable of averaging 20 ppg+. Tendency to get out over his skis. Plays hard and fast; sometimes to his own detriment. Who failed to rein that in? Also, was never, ever a PG. Who insisted on trying to make him one? Billy.
Williams: Horrible commitment made to start him. Likely kept the Bulls from being a plus .500 team by being in the starting lineup. Who allowed the Bulls to play 4 against 5 for hundreds of games by giving him starter entitlement minutes? Billy.

The Bulls went from a 46 win team to a 39 win team. Lost more games each season. Would have lost significantly more last season if not for the late season weak schedule against tanking teams. Who has been the head coach as we have watched the team get worse, and worse, despite the exact same roster? Billy.

Who wanted all 6'8" positionless players, and now complains the team isn't physical enough? Billy.

And don't even get me started on the in-game management and other rotation issues.

Good LORD have you construed the talent to be much more than most of us believe it has been, especially as a group. You're talking about individual "production" and accolades. The team has always been very poorly constructed under Billy. Now part of that may be his fault - he may very well have asked for it.

Your perceptions of Vuc, Zach, Demar and more are just absolutely bonkers. There are great reasons that NONE of these guys have been sought after for YEARS now. They're not good! I mean Zach might be, despite his flaws ("GREAT on ball defense" LMFAO!), but Vuc SUCKS and has for YEARS if not his whole career, and Demar has been a one decent trick pony.

Points per game is an incredibly unwise way to judge players but that's generally how "all stars" are selected.

No. I just stated facts. Ok, you disagree about Lavine being great on-ball. Almost everyone, even his detractors, say he was at least good on-ball. He got accolades for his defense when playing with the American team under...oh...a different coach. Meanwhile. You give me personal opinions. What did I say, other than my classification of Lavine's on-ball defense, that you disagree with? I can go back and find the Center rankings the first few seasons Vuc was here if you would like.

So the stats agree with me, and consensus opinions would agree with everything I said. And why do you think my perceptions of those 3 players were inflated? Did I not point out Zach's bad team defense, that Demar was a ball stopper, and that Vuc had an overinflated view of his own role in the offense?

Almost everything you wrote is just absolutely ludicrous.

A few highlights:

Demar has never been a highly efficient scorer. He also sucked on defense his entire time here.

Citing "double double machine" as something of note. You've been leaning very heavily on box score counting stats forever. Nobody does that because everyone knows it's incredibly outdated, misleading and irrelevant.

MVP discussion for both Zach and Demar LMFAO.

Vuc hasn't been a top 10 C in his career, let alone until a year ago.

You're an extreme contrarian. I recognize it because I have a little bit of those instincts too haha, but you're the resident King Contrarian by a mile lol. It's OK, we still value your perspective for sure. Plenty of times you're also among the few people who's right on an issue. But it's not remotely consensus on this board or anywhere in NBA circles that Billy has had a highly talented roster in his tenure. Some talented pieces? Sure. That fit together HORRIBLY in an obvious way both on paper and in reality.

[Stratmaster]

You don't notice the disparity there? The problem isn't the lack of championships. It's the inability to even get the team into the playoffs. You can downplay the talent that was on the team all you want. It doesn't matter. You don't get re-upped twice in the NBA for not making the playoffs season after season. That is a failure. Unless you are Billy Donovan and the front office is the Chicago Bulls.

We are in a situation where the coach is viewed a lot more favorably than the GM. I can't think of another team in the same boat. The Bulls are that couple in the streets where everyone looks and wonders "Damn, how did he get her?"

Donovan could easily land another NBA HC job. The Knicks wanted him. Or, he could have a number of major college programs lining up to sign a blank check. He's in a fantastic position.

AK won't land another GM job at this rate.

The failure is clearly on the front office. I'm sure they know that. These teams had no business even sniffing play-in. And if they fire Donovan, they're sticking their neck out and saying that they've built solid playoff teams, they didn't get there, and it's Donovan's fault. And we all know that's not true.

So here we are.

Two things can be true. the fact that the front office sucks (as evidenced by extending a losing coach twice) doesn't mean the coach is good.

As far as the Knicks, that is likely the one front office head coaches would view worse than the Bulls. Speaking of which, why did Billy want to stay here so badly if the front office sucks so badly? Is he that bad a judge of his own situation?

[jnrjr79]

I gave the pros and cons of the players. I was responding to a post that portrayed 3 all-stars as trash without citing a single positive. But mine is the one-sided one. Sure. Whatever you say. And if you think Billy wasn't consulted as to the types of players he wanted, you are being foolish. Or...maybe that's why they keep extending him. Because he is a weak mealy-mouthed simp who won't speak out for himself.

Well, it’s disingenuous to call Vooch an All-Star. He’s never made an All-Star team here. His contributions to Orlando, which were limited to putting up big numbers on bad teams, aren’t really relevant to his quality as a Bull.


I have no idea how much Billy was “consulted” about acquisitions, but NBA coaches typically have way less say-so on personnel than in, say, football. I have no particular reason to believe that Billy has had a lot of influence on free agent acquisitions, trades, and the draft.

The thing you didn’t respond to that is pretty telling is that Zach and DeMar now exist on the same team, and have a better third wheel than Vooch in Sabonis, and yet the team still sucks. These guys may have positive attributes, but a team built around them is not likely to be good.

In any event, I know nobody is ever going to convince you that Billy is good, despite the fact that he consistently drags this bad roster to better-than-expected results.

Vuc came to Billy Donovan off all-star credentials. that isn't relevant to how Billy may have affected the performance of his players? And Demar and Zach have existed in Sac for less than half a season. I'll bet you a pizza that Sac has a better record, playing against tougher competition, than the Bulls this season.

No, I don’t think it’s particularly relevant. Vooch is the same guy. But when he’s a third wheel, you see him for what he is. He sucks, the whole board knows he sucks, we have been complaining for years about how much he sucks, and literally nobody else seems to think “Vooch is great and Billy is holding him back.” This is, to put it mildly, an outlier opinion.

But again. I keep stating facts. You and others don't respond to any of them. You just keep making excuses for Billy. And then have the ironic gall to think you are somehow "calling me out" because I didn't respond to comments about the Kings. Is Billy coaching the Kings? Nope. Just "whataboutism". And in no way, in overall performance since Billy came here, have the Bulls outperformed expectations. Are you saying your expectations when Billy got here were that the Bulls would get to 1 playoff series in 5 seasons? And if I had told you that the day after he was hired, and also told you that he would get 2 extensions for that effort, what would your response have been?

None of this really makes any sense. It’s not “whataboutism” to note that when the two key pieces of this team ended up on a different team, that team was not good, because it shows you that coaching is not the issue here. Heck, coaching isn’t the issue most places, because NBA coaches just don’t have a huge impact on wins and losses. It’s a talent league.

Your question about what my “expectations” were when Billy got here is also absurd. Nobody has “expectations” for a coach in isolation. My expectations for how the team will perform is based upon how much talent the team has. The Bulls have performed better than my expectations based on the roster. And my view here is the consensus view, so it’s weird to have it framed like you have where it’s somehow crazy. It’d be one thing if you were saying “I know this isn’t a popular opinion, but I think Billy has been the problem,” but you act like it’s everyone else that holds the odd view.

As to your question about what I would have said after he was hired, this is again pointless and silly. I’d have been surprised, but not if you also told me what players he’d have during that time. Then, I’d have gone “ah, ok, I get it. Coaching wasn’t the problem.”

I get it. Billy is a likeable guy. A great college coach. He makes you want to like him. But he is a poor NBA coach. He will be fine for the next couple seasons because the Bulls will be more like a college team anyway. I have already come to terms with that and it is fine. But don't act like he has shown anything in Chicago that would indicate he is a good head coach in the NBA

He, in fact, has shown that. I don’t think he’s an elite coach, but he’s perfectly solid and a good fit for where the Bulls are right now.

If the Bulls fired Billy, the overwhelming likelihood is his replacement would be worse.

[Red Larrivee]

Two things can be true. the fact that the front office sucks (as evidenced by extending a losing coach twice) doesn't mean the coach is good.

As far as the Knicks, that is likely the one front office head coaches would view worse than the Bulls. Speaking of which, why did Billy want to stay here so badly if the front office sucks so badly? Is he that bad a judge of his own situation?

Donovan is paid well, has a great relationship with ownership and the front office. They even gave his son a role with the GL team. Why wouldn't he want to stay? Sounds like a sweet gig to me.

Jim Boylen and Tim Floyd were bad coaches: Clearly incompetent, not respected, poor leaders and in over their heads. Donovan is flawed, but not bad. Like Duck said, if you're hungry he's a quality bacon cheeseburger. You may have a desire for something more, but it doesn't mean what you had was bad either.

[Indomitable]

Billy actually coaching the way he should in my mind now.

Does not mean he was not underwhelming before though

[jnrjr79]

Billy actually coaching the way he should in my mind now.

Does not mean he was not underwhelming before though

This is because he has an almost-new roster.

Say what you will about Billy, but one of his pluses is that he implements systems that play to his rosters' strengths and hides their weaknesses.

[2weekswithpay]

Derozan had a negative on/off plus minus in every season except one before he came to the Bulls. Derozan's best 3 year stretch was in Chicago under Donovan.

I said this in the contract extension thread. Donovan has gotten the most out of his players, and the Bulls have outperformed just about every preseason win projection I've seen.

[sco]

No, he's pretty garbage and the Bulls should be constantly looking to improve their coaching

I think that there is a definite advantage in terms of developing young players to not change coaches during their first few years. I think these guys take a developmental step back during that time if they are learning new systems and terminology.

[jnrjr79]

Derozan had a negative on/off plus minus in every season except one before he came to the Bulls. Derozan's best 3 year stretch was in Chicago under Donovan.

I said this in the contract extension thread. Donovan has gotten the most out of his players, and the Bulls have outperformed just about every preseason win projection I've seen.

Probably not a coincidence that when Toronto swapped out DeRozan for a player with just as much scoring prowess, but also played great on the defensive end, they won an NBA title.

IMO, the league is getting wise to players who score a lot of points but don’t do much else.

[PaKii94]

Derozan had a negative on/off plus minus in every season except one before he came to the Bulls. Derozan's best 3 year stretch was in Chicago under Donovan.

I said this in the contract extension thread. Donovan has gotten the most out of his players, and the Bulls have outperformed just about every preseason win projection I've seen.

With all due respect, ddr as a person I respect a lot but he was/is a career loser. He's Lavine before Lavine. He was young Jimmy B's son every single time

[Stratmaster]

Well, it’s disingenuous to call Vooch an All-Star. He’s never made an All-Star team here. His contributions to Orlando, which were limited to putting up big numbers on bad teams, aren’t really relevant to his quality as a Bull.


I have no idea how much Billy was “consulted” about acquisitions, but NBA coaches typically have way less say-so on personnel than in, say, football. I have no particular reason to believe that Billy has had a lot of influence on free agent acquisitions, trades, and the draft.

The thing you didn’t respond to that is pretty telling is that Zach and DeMar now exist on the same team, and have a better third wheel than Vooch in Sabonis, and yet the team still sucks. These guys may have positive attributes, but a team built around them is not likely to be good.

In any event, I know nobody is ever going to convince you that Billy is good, despite the fact that he consistently drags this bad roster to better-than-expected results.

Vuc came to Billy Donovan off all-star credentials. that isn't relevant to how Billy may have affected the performance of his players? And Demar and Zach have existed in Sac for less than half a season. I'll bet you a pizza that Sac has a better record, playing against tougher competition, than the Bulls this season.

No, I don’t think it’s particularly relevant. Vooch is the same guy. But when he’s a third wheel, you see him for what he is. He sucks, the whole board knows he sucks, we have been complaining for years about how much he sucks, and literally nobody else seems to think “Vooch is great and Billy is holding him back.” This is, to put it mildly, an outlier opinion.

But again. I keep stating facts. You and others don't respond to any of them. You just keep making excuses for Billy. And then have the ironic gall to think you are somehow "calling me out" because I didn't respond to comments about the Kings. Is Billy coaching the Kings? Nope. Just "whataboutism". And in no way, in overall performance since Billy came here, have the Bulls outperformed expectations. Are you saying your expectations when Billy got here were that the Bulls would get to 1 playoff series in 5 seasons? And if I had told you that the day after he was hired, and also told you that he would get 2 extensions for that effort, what would your response have been?

None of this really makes any sense. It’s not “whataboutism” to note that when the two key pieces of this team ended up on a different team, that team was not good, because it shows you that coaching is not the issue here. Heck, coaching isn’t the issue most places, because NBA coaches just don’t have a huge impact on wins and losses. It’s a talent league.

Your question about what my “expectations” were when Billy got here is also absurd. Nobody has “expectations” for a coach in isolation. My expectations for how the team will perform is based upon how much talent the team has. The Bulls have performed better than my expectations based on the roster. And my view here is the consensus view, so it’s weird to have it framed like you have where it’s somehow crazy. It’d be one thing if you were saying “I know this isn’t a popular opinion, but I think Billy has been the problem,” but you act like it’s everyone else that holds the odd view.

As to your question about what I would have said after he was hired, this is again pointless and silly. I’d have been surprised, but not if you also told me what players he’d have during that time. Then, I’d have gone “ah, ok, I get it. Coaching wasn’t the problem.”

I get it. Billy is a likeable guy. A great college coach. He makes you want to like him. But he is a poor NBA coach. He will be fine for the next couple seasons because the Bulls will be more like a college team anyway. I have already come to terms with that and it is fine. But don't act like he has shown anything in Chicago that would indicate he is a good head coach in the NBA

He, in fact, has shown that. I don’t think he’s an elite coach, but he’s perfectly solid and a good fit for where the Bulls are right now.

If the Bulls fired Billy, the overwhelming likelihood is his replacement would be worse.

You're back to strawman arguments, putting words in mouths and pointing to your line of friends as backup while you completely ignore context. Enjoy arguing with yourself because you sure as hell aren't debating what I said.

[Stratmaster]

Billy actually coaching the way he should in my mind now.

Does not mean he was not underwhelming before though

This is because he has an almost-new roster.

Say what you will about Billy, but one of his pluses is that he implements systems that play to his rosters' strengths and hides their weaknesses.

That is hilarious.

[Stratmaster]

Two things can be true. the fact that the front office sucks (as evidenced by extending a losing coach twice) doesn't mean the coach is good.

As far as the Knicks, that is likely the one front office head coaches would view worse than the Bulls. Speaking of which, why did Billy want to stay here so badly if the front office sucks so badly? Is he that bad a judge of his own situation?

Donovan is paid well, has a great relationship with ownership and the front office. They even gave his son a role with the GL team. Why wouldn't he want to stay? Sounds like a sweet gig to me.

Jim Boylen and Tim Floyd were bad coaches: Clearly incompetent, not respected, poor leaders and in over their heads. Donovan is flawed, but not bad. Like Duck said, if you're hungry he's a quality bacon cheeseburger. You may have a desire for something more, but it doesn't mean what you had was bad either.

Exactly. His priorities have nothing to do with winning. He is the perfect example of the old saying "fat, dumb and happy"

[jnrjr79]

Billy actually coaching the way he should in my mind now.

Does not mean he was not underwhelming before though

This is because he has an almost-new roster.

Say what you will about Billy, but one of his pluses is that he implements systems that play to his rosters' strengths and hides their weaknesses.

That is hilarious.

Billy literally reworked the entire offensive system last season due to the change in personnel, but I’m glad you find it amusing.

[Stratmaster]

This is because he has an almost-new roster.

Say what you will about Billy, but one of his pluses is that he implements systems that play to his rosters' strengths and hides their weaknesses.

That is hilarious.

Billy literally reworked the entire offensive system last season due to the change in personnel, but I’m glad you find it amusing.

Really? What offensive system was installed? He went from no offensive system to no offensive system. Quite a rework. oh wait. He went from the play slow stand in the corner offensive system to the run fast and shoot right away offensive system.

[jnrjr79]

That is hilarious.

Billy literally reworked the entire offensive system last season due to the change in personnel, but I’m glad you find it amusing.

Really? What offensive system was installed? He went from no offensive system to no offensive system. Quite a rework. oh wait. He went from the play slow stand in the corner offensive system to the run fast and shoot right away offensive system.

So…he changed systems?

Hate Billy all you want, but this specific criticism is pretty nuts. He ran a plodding, half-court offense that hid the Bulls’ defensive deficiencies when he had the prior group, and now runs an up-tempo, three-point FG heavy system that amounts to “we’ll suck on defense, but we’ll outscore the opponent” system based on the current group. Though with AK’s comments about Okoro/defense, I expect that may be tweaked further this season.

The idea that Billy does not adapt his system to personnel is just totally unsupportable.

[Stratmaster]

Billy literally reworked the entire offensive system last season due to the change in personnel, but I’m glad you find it amusing.

Really? What offensive system was installed? He went from no offensive system to no offensive system. Quite a rework. oh wait. He went from the play slow stand in the corner offensive system to the run fast and shoot right away offensive system.

So…he changed systems?

Hate Billy all you want, but this specific criticism is pretty nuts. He ran a plodding, half-court offense that hid the Bulls’ defensive deficiencies when he had the prior group, and now runs an up-tempo, three-point FG heavy system that amounts to “we’ll suck on defense, but we’ll outscore the opponent” system based on the current group. Though with AK’s comments about Okoro/defense, I expect that may be tweaked further this season.

The idea that Billy does not adapt his system to personnel is just totally unsupportable.

What's is the new system. Fill me in.

[jnrjr79]

Really? What offensive system was installed? He went from no offensive system to no offensive system. Quite a rework. oh wait. He went from the play slow stand in the corner offensive system to the run fast and shoot right away offensive system.

So…he changed systems?

Hate Billy all you want, but this specific criticism is pretty nuts. He ran a plodding, half-court offense that hid the Bulls’ defensive deficiencies when he had the prior group, and now runs an up-tempo, three-point FG heavy system that amounts to “we’ll suck on defense, but we’ll outscore the opponent” system based on the current group. Though with AK’s comments about Okoro/defense, I expect that may be tweaked further this season.

The idea that Billy does not adapt his system to personnel is just totally unsupportable.

What's is the new system. Fill me in.

The Chicago Bulls are sticking to their word.

In a single summer, they changed the way they play — entirely. And after preaching pace of play throughout the preseason, the Bulls have exploded onto the scene as the NBA’s fastest team through their first five games.

Teams often fail to deliver on such preseason platitudes, but the Bulls have accomplished a complete revamping of their offensive system, leaning into their strengths in an attempt to cover their lack of size and defensive rigor. As a result, they’re off to an unexpected 3-2 start, the first time they’ve been above .500 since November 2022.

The shift in philosophy is predicated on one simple edict: run.

“I told them — we don’t run, we’re done,” coach Billy Donovan said. “It’s that simple. If we run, we’ll maybe have some fun.”

The Bulls had a similar goal last season — but Donovan said it was doomed from the start. The roster wasn’t built to run. But the departures of DeMar DeRozan and Andre Drummond relieved the Bulls of their dependency on a more methodical style of play.

https://sports.yahoo.com/chicago-bulls-nba-fastest-team-202900965.html

Indeed, as Schumann also notes, the Bulls made the second biggest jumps in the NBA last year in both ball and player movement and were the only team to rank in the top three in both categories. Unsurprisingly, that led to the league's most significant bump in overall shot quality.

The totality of those improvements on offense that also, critically, led to an increase in winning are positive developments for Chicago that can realistically carry over to 2025-26.

https://pippenainteasy.com/bulls-power-rankings-irritating-grade-raises-questions-preseason

Chicago Bulls’ Offensive Stats
The Chicago Bulls have comfortably sat near the top of the league in points per game over the first month and a half. A big part of this has been their drastic uptick in three-point shot attempts per game. After finishing 26th in this department last season – and 30th in the two seasons prior – the Bulls are shooting the second-most attempts from downtown per game. The Boston Celtics are the only team to rank ahead of them after finishing top 2 in this category the past two seasons.

Additionally, the Bulls aren’t just trying to embrace a more modern style of play, they are succeeding in shocking fashion. The Bulls are nailing 38.4 percent of their threes, which is the fifth-highest clip in the league. Nikola Vucevic and Zach LaVine have played major roles in creating those numbers, as both are shooting upwards of 40.0 percent on at least 4.0 attempts per game this season.

Having said that, the Bulls are also doing a great job creating open looks and moving the ball along the perimeter. Everyone on this roster deserves credit for buying into an equal-opportunity system. The team’s ball movement has truly been a breath of fresh air, as they rank fourth in assists per game.

https://www.bleachernation.com/bulls/2024/12/11/bulls-offense-defense-dif/

Following the departure of DeMar DeRozan in the 2024 offseason, Donovan overhauled the Bulls offense, turning up the pace from 28th in 2023-24 to second in 2024-25.

The Bulls also adapted their shot profile to the modern NBA in 2024-25, shooting 42 three-pointers per game, the third most in the league. That figure can be a little misleading, considering they had more possessions per game than all but one team.

Still, their three-point attempt rate — the percentage of their total shots that came from beyond the arc — ranked third most in the league, at 42.4 percent. That improvement launched them up from 32.9 percent the previous season, 26th in the NBA.

https://allchgo.com/bulls-billy-donovan-multi-year-contract-extension/

Billy Donovan keeps making strides the Bulls cannot ignore
Donovan has held the squad together.

Billy Donovan has been the catalyst behind Chicago's improvement

While shifting the rookie Buzelis into the starting five might have originally seemed like a ploy to embrace the tank, Donovan has held the 11th overall pick accountable. Buzelis has reached the 30-minute threshold as often as he's played less than 20 minutes in March. Buzelis hasn't been given an unlimited leash, which is something he appreciates.

The rookie recently said, “I told Billy that I want to be pushed to the limit. I want to be the best player ever. That's just how I think. He has done a great job holding me accountable. And I thank him. When he takes me out for a mistake, I get better." Donovan's coaching style has been a boon for Buzelis and it's evident in how he's improved over the past few months.

Besides Donovan's persistence with Chicago's most-prized prospect, he's gotten the most out of Tre Jones, Kevin Huerter, and Zach Collins. Immediately after being acquired, it was anticipated that the Bulls would move on from the triumvirate. Nonetheless, the trio has remained in the Windy City and all have played significant roles.

Jones has averaged 11.5 points since being traded to the Bulls—a seven-point increase following his time in San Antonio. The 6-foot-1 guard has looked rejuvenated in Chicago's high-paced offense. Collins has increased his scoring output by 5.5 points since the trade. The big man has been instrumental to the Bulls' defensive turnaround. Chicago is 12.6 points better defensively with Collins on the floor.

Lastly, Huerter has begun to shake off his season-long shooting slump in March. The 6-foot-7 forward has fit in well alongside Giddey and White. Huerter has averaged 5.0 more points per game since departing Sacramento. He's canning 35.7 percent of his 7.4 three-pointers per contest as a member of the Bulls.

In the midst of a transitive era of Bulls' basketball, Donovan has held the squad together and gotten the most out of a middling unit. From early season benching to All-Star-level play, Donovan has been the catalyst behind Giddey's improvement—yet another example of how the coach's detail-oriented approach has paid off. Credit must be given to Donovan for the Bulls' second-half surge.

https://pippenainteasy.com/billy-donovan-keeps-making-strides-bulls-cannot-ignore

Bulls need a lot of fixing the next few years but have the right coach
Coach Billy Donovan had his share of critics going into the season, but a look at all the changes he has implemented shows that he remains the right guy for this franchise. The players will tell you so, as will the numbers.

Just further evidence that while Karnisovas has made more poor decisions than good in his tenure, coaching isn’t an issue.

Donovan has his critics. Then again, those same critics would rather blame the construction foreman instead of the architect for the faulty -design.

Donovan has shown that he understands personnel, and more importantly, he allows the personnel to dictate scheme rather than the other way around.

That’s what good coaches do. Donovan isn’t trying to pound a square peg into a round hole because he’s stuck on how he wants them to play.

With a far less talented team this season thanks to the departures of DeMar DeRozan, Alex Caruso and Drummond, the Bulls have completely flipped the way they play offensively, going from a slow, methodical offense (28th in pace last season) to one that has led the league in pace most of the season.

Not an easy transition.

The Bulls have also gone from 26th in the league in three-point attempts (32.1 per game) last season to third (42.9 per game).

Coaches often say they are going to make scheme changes from year to year, and in most cases it’s subtle at best. These are -seismic in nature from Donovan, and his players have embraced it.

https://chicago.suntimes.com/bulls/2024/11/30/bulls-need-fixing-next-few-years-but-have-right-coach