Billy Donovan

[Stratmaster]

As a side note, I think the "develop" list is Coby, Zach, PW, Lauri and Wendell. There is a reason they are locked on starters.

I don't think that Gafford, Val, Kornett, etc. are being developed. I think they get used in a way that is supposed to be helping the fab 5 and if they fail, they go away like Hutch and Gafford. I don't get the Val minutes outside of them not having many other options. If Otto was healthy, I wonder if Val would play at all.

The problem is, other than Zach, there has been no development of the others.

It very well could be that what we see is what we get with Lauri and WCJ.

Obviously PWill is still an infant in basketball terms.

Which brings me to another point where we may disagree. I don't think starting most 1st and 2nd year players is positive for their development. Obviously there are exceptions. Players who are ready beyond their years both physically and psychologically with elite skills.

I don't think handing Carter a starting spot helped his development. I don't think it helped Lauri, or is helping Coby's development. I don't think it is helping PWill.

I think if the team had been healthy, starting Sato and Otto would have been better for Coby and PWill. Now that Sato is healthy he should start. Otto will never be healthy enough to start, and Lauri can't stay on the court, so PWill is stuck being thrown to the wolves.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Stratmaster]

Saying that I don't think Lavine is better than he was years ago is a complete mis-characterization of my opinion. If you stated that opinion, and I disagreed please point me to the post so I can acknowledge my stupid response.

I believe you are referring to when I said Zach Lavine was never stupid.

How does his improvement over many years factor into this discussion?

I think we may have been talking past each other or maybe not.

I have no idea how smart Zach is personally. I was talking about basketball IQ. Those quick reflex decisions that get made countless times in game. Early on in his career, I thought that Zach had an extraordinarily low basketball IQ. I think that most of his improvements as a player are a direct result of him having an exceptionally large improvement there because his athleticism, shooting and ballhandling has always been there.

I think this is core to this discussion because I think that Pat, Coby and Lauri also have pretty low basketball IQ's. Lauri has all of the tools to be an elite NBA player but he just doesn't know when to pass, drive, help on defense or box out. Coby doesn't have nearly that same ceiling but he does have the shot, touch and physical size to be a contributor. PatW could also be an elite player but his default decision on offense is always to defer. You can see him overthinking frequently.

Wendell is different. I'm not so sure he has the size or coordination to be a good player.

I think this all ties together because what I see is that the Bulls seem to be trying to make the concerted effort to raise the basketball IQ of all of these guys and are willing to lose games to do it. Zach has proven (to me) that its possible and I have seen green shoots with Coby and Lauri as well as team wide improvements.

We are talking past each other. I don't think of BBIQ as something you improve. I understand that term as a player's innate and natural instincts.

What you are describing I call gaining experience and learning the intricacies of the game. Absolutely Zach has done that with improvement season after season.

Zach not forcing shots isn't BBIQ. It is trusting teammates. You will notice that when no one else is performing those forced shots start to creep out again. That is what all go to scorers do. It isn't poor BBIQ. It's necessity. His less "bad" shots is directly in relationship to his teammates level of play.

I also fear we are wasting a playoff season on developing players who will never develop (at least not in the way they are trying to develop them) and may not even be on the team.

Trying to develop White into a PG in the middle of a season is IMHO insanity. Just stupid.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[coldfish]

Just as another comment, I have been on the Bulls board for a long time. If people recall, 10 to 15 years ago I was strongly against entitlement minutes. I thought that the best players should play and that most improvement happens in practice. I strongly defended Skiles' and Thibodeau's use of young players.

That thought pattern came from my personal life. When I played myself (which I wasn't good mind you), I was a practice fiend. I would work and work and work in practice and I saw improvements in my shot, handle, etc. I thought improvement was all about practice.

I have been coaching now for almost 10 years (again, really low level and I'm not particularly good) and that different perspective has changed my opinion. Its just really hard to teach players certain things in practice. Game experience, like serious close games, can't really be replicated.

I still don't support the Hoiberg model of just rolling the ball out there. You have to try to make the games competitive to get learning from it. That said, I have moved away from the Thibodeau school too. I don't think BD is perfect. I disagree with several things he has done but overall I would give him an "A" for this season. I see the reasoning behind many things.

[Ice Man]

I fully agree with Strat's post. That said, with Sato showing that he is no better than a fringe NBA starter last year and Otto expiring of old age, Billy didn't have a lot of choices for his other guard position and for his small forward slot when this year began. So I won't criticize the decisions that he did make. He had severe roster problems.

[coldfish]

Saying that I don't think Lavine is better than he was years ago is a complete mis-characterization of my opinion. If you stated that opinion, and I disagreed please point me to the post so I can acknowledge my stupid response.

I believe you are referring to when I said Zach Lavine was never stupid.

How does his improvement over many years factor into this discussion?

I think we may have been talking past each other or maybe not.

I have no idea how smart Zach is personally. I was talking about basketball IQ. Those quick reflex decisions that get made countless times in game. Early on in his career, I thought that Zach had an extraordinarily low basketball IQ. I think that most of his improvements as a player are a direct result of him having an exceptionally large improvement there because his athleticism, shooting and ballhandling has always been there.

I think this is core to this discussion because I think that Pat, Coby and Lauri also have pretty low basketball IQ's. Lauri has all of the tools to be an elite NBA player but he just doesn't know when to pass, drive, help on defense or box out. Coby doesn't have nearly that same ceiling but he does have the shot, touch and physical size to be a contributor. PatW could also be an elite player but his default decision on offense is always to defer. You can see him overthinking frequently.

Wendell is different. I'm not so sure he has the size or coordination to be a good player.

I think this all ties together because what I see is that the Bulls seem to be trying to make the concerted effort to raise the basketball IQ of all of these guys and are willing to lose games to do it. Zach has proven (to me) that its possible and I have seen green shoots with Coby and Lauri as well as team wide improvements.

We are talking past each other. I don't think of BBIQ as something you improve. I understand that term as a player's innate and natural instincts.

What you are describing I call gaining experience and learning the intricacies of the game. Absolutely Zach has done that with improvement season after season.

Zach not forcing shots isn't BBIQ. It is trusting teammates. You will notice that when no one else is performing those forced shots start to creep out again. That is what all go to scorers do. It isn't poor BBIQ. It's necessity. His less "bad" shots is directly in relationship to his teammates level of play.

I also fear we are wasting a playoff season on developing players who will never develop (at least not in the way they are trying to develop them) and may not even be on the team.

Trying to develop White into a PG in the middle of a season is IMHO insanity. Just stupid.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I'll be curious if the Bulls switch to "playoff" mode at some point. Its still pretty early in the season. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point we see the rotation changed with the emphasis being on winning that game.

I also have no idea what they will do at the trade deadline. Anything I say would be pure speculation. I'm not sure if AK is going to want to buy, sell or stay pat.

I do think the Bulls would benefit from making the playoffs. OTOH, they would benefit from not making the playoffs too (lottery pick). Its almost like the idea is to put the young guys in the best position you can put them and see what happens. If they fail to make the playoffs, its because they weren't good enough and you need to add more talent.

The wildcard in this is Zach Lavine's free agency. I would hate to lose him because you wanted to turn Coby into a PG.

[Stratmaster]

I fully agree with Strat's post. That said, with Sato showing that he is no better than a fringe NBA starter last year and Otto expiring of old age, Billy didn't have a lot of choices for his other guard position and for his small forward slot when this year began. So I won't criticize the decisions that he did make. He had severe roster problems.

There is a part of me that thinks starting Val for 6 minutes each half (instead of playing him 21 minutes off the bench) still would be a better plan both for PWill development and wins. Or even starting Temple and Thad at the 3/4.

And I definitely think Sato should be starting at PG and the Bulls should let Coby be Coby... off the bench.

Starting Carter? That ship sailed last season and the Bulls committed to him starting with the lack of another alternative.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[ImSlower]

Having Lauri and Otto actually healthy will be as good for Donovan as it will be for fans.

God willing it means we won't see Valentine again, who has been adept at helping opposing teams go on and continue big runs against us. Well timed bricks and turnovers abound.

I'm not sure how we can stop Ayton (or Embiid or KAT or other scoring bigs unless they pull a Sabonis and have a clunker game against us) with Lauri. Last night I think Thad was battered and hurt. Lauri in while he recovers on the bench would have perhaps kept our on-court bigs fresh. Carter continues to be very easy to read from his mannerisms. Last night he was pouting like a grounded teenager and made his usual gaffes. Again, maybe he keeps his focus if we have 32 minutes of Lauri in the mix.

If we collapse this badly with a full crew, well, cross our fingers the 10th-14thish lottery slot becomes a low number ping pong ball.

Bummer second half, because we sure looked great that 2nd quarter and out the gate in the 3rd.

[Stratmaster]

I think we may have been talking past each other or maybe not.

I have no idea how smart Zach is personally. I was talking about basketball IQ. Those quick reflex decisions that get made countless times in game. Early on in his career, I thought that Zach had an extraordinarily low basketball IQ. I think that most of his improvements as a player are a direct result of him having an exceptionally large improvement there because his athleticism, shooting and ballhandling has always been there.

I think this is core to this discussion because I think that Pat, Coby and Lauri also have pretty low basketball IQ's. Lauri has all of the tools to be an elite NBA player but he just doesn't know when to pass, drive, help on defense or box out. Coby doesn't have nearly that same ceiling but he does have the shot, touch and physical size to be a contributor. PatW could also be an elite player but his default decision on offense is always to defer. You can see him overthinking frequently.

Wendell is different. I'm not so sure he has the size or coordination to be a good player.

I think this all ties together because what I see is that the Bulls seem to be trying to make the concerted effort to raise the basketball IQ of all of these guys and are willing to lose games to do it. Zach has proven (to me) that its possible and I have seen green shoots with Coby and Lauri as well as team wide improvements.

We are talking past each other. I don't think of BBIQ as something you improve. I understand that term as a player's innate and natural instincts.

What you are describing I call gaining experience and learning the intricacies of the game. Absolutely Zach has done that with improvement season after season.

Zach not forcing shots isn't BBIQ. It is trusting teammates. You will notice that when no one else is performing those forced shots start to creep out again. That is what all go to scorers do. It isn't poor BBIQ. It's necessity. His less "bad" shots is directly in relationship to his teammates level of play.

I also fear we are wasting a playoff season on developing players who will never develop (at least not in the way they are trying to develop them) and may not even be on the team.

Trying to develop White into a PG in the middle of a season is IMHO insanity. Just stupid.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

I'll be curious if the Bulls switch to "playoff" mode at some point. Its still pretty early in the season. I wouldn't be surprised if at some point we see the rotation changed with the emphasis being on winning that game.

I also have no idea what they will do at the trade deadline. Anything I say would be pure speculation. I'm not sure if AK is going to want to buy, sell or stay pat.

I do think the Bulls would benefit from making the playoffs. OTOH, they would benefit from not making the playoffs too (lottery pick). Its almost like the idea is to put the young guys in the best position you can put them and see what happens. If they fail to make the playoffs, its because they weren't good enough and you need to add more talent.

The wildcard in this is Zach Lavine's free agency. I would hate to lose him because you wanted to turn Coby into a PG.

Yeah that playoff switch is a dangerous thing. They have now lost at least 3, maybe even 4 or 5, games to this dedication to development or whatever it is Billy is doing. That can easily be the difference between making the playoffs or missing them. Hell, this season it can be the difference between home court advantage in the playoffs vs. missing the playoffs completely.

And yes. I am concerned that making the playoffs this season, and then actually winning a playoff series next season, may determine whether Lavine stays. I think he wants to be here but if it were me, and I felt like the organization was purposely holding back, I would be looking elsewhere, and I grew up a Bulls fan. He didn't.

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[TSS]

I generally support BD on pretty much everything he has done, but on this aspect I am siding with Strat. I do not believe in the model of teaching youth via pushing your players into the deep end and watching whether they can swim. I am fine with them starting the games but if they seem to struggle and seem overmatched get them out end talk to them on the bench. Then give them another try and if it still does not work, repeat.

I see no value in youngsters necessarily closing the games. It is no better moment to learn than first three quarters in the game are.
You close with the crew that will bring you the W.

Regarding Pat I am concerned about the lack of involvement and aggression. Watch him play off the ball next game. He does the needed cuts and moves to keep the offense flowing but he is a passenger doing them. If you break down basketball, every situation is a 1 on 1 competition you strive to win. Zach is excellent example of it. He cuts with the sole purpose of beating his defender to get the ball. Pat seems to cut because playbook says so. I think this goes with most of the stuff he does on court, the desire to win every fight is not there and that is really hard piece to teach.

[Stratmaster]

Just as another comment, I have been on the Bulls board for a long time. If people recall, 10 to 15 years ago I was strongly against entitlement minutes. I thought that the best players should play and that most improvement happens in practice. I strongly defended Skiles' and Thibodeau's use of young players.

That thought pattern came from my personal life. When I played myself (which I wasn't good mind you), I was a practice fiend. I would work and work and work in practice and I saw improvements in my shot, handle, etc. I thought improvement was all about practice.

I have been coaching now for almost 10 years (again, really low level and I'm not particularly good) and that different perspective has changed my opinion. Its just really hard to teach players certain things in practice. Game experience, like serious close games, can't really be replicated.

I still don't support the Hoiberg model of just rolling the ball out there. You have to try to make the games competitive to get learning from it. That said, I have moved away from the Thibodeau school too. I don't think BD is perfect. I disagree with several things he has done but overall I would give him an "A" for this season. I see the reasoning behind many things.

I meant to mention. I am not saying these guys don't need to see court time. Of course they do. But you don't need to play Val, Coby, WCJ and Arch all together for 6 minutes of q4 in a close game against one of the best teams in the league. Especially on a night when the 2 best players of those 4 are playing badly (I am likely off a little on that lineup I can't remember exactly what it was, but hopefully it communicates the idea)

EDIT: to start q4 it was Sato, Arch, Val, Pwill, Young.

Lavine, Kornet Temple and White then replaced Sato, Thad, PWill and Arch at around 7:30

At 5:46 WCJ replaced Kornet.

At 4:17 Thad replaced Val (so Val got 8 minutes in q4 of a close game against a top tier team)

At 2:31 PWill came in for Carter.

That is a rotation that screams "I have no idea who to play". At no point did Billy ever have his best 5 man group on the court in q4.




Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[Ice Man]

But you don't need to play Val, Coby, WCJ and Arch all together for 6 minutes of q4 in a close game against one of the best teams in the league. Especially on a night when the 2 best players of those 4 are playing badly (I am likely off a little on that lineup I can't remember exactly what it was, but hopefully it communicates the idea)

I'm not sure what choice Billy had yesterday -

WCJ - Off night in a big way
Pat - Silent night
Thad - Good first half, tired in the second
Lauri - Unavailable
Otto - Unavailable
Kornet - Come on
Gafford - Ditto
Felicio - Even more so

Those were all his potential bigs, including 3s that could be regarded as bigs when running a small lineup. It's pretty difficult to play those cards.

[Stratmaster]

But you don't need to play Val, Coby, WCJ and Arch all together for 6 minutes of q4 in a close game against one of the best teams in the league. Especially on a night when the 2 best players of those 4 are playing badly (I am likely off a little on that lineup I can't remember exactly what it was, but hopefully it communicates the idea)

I'm not sure what choice Billy had yesterday -

WCJ - Off night in a big way
Pat - Silent night
Thad - Good first half, tired in the second
Lauri - Unavailable
Otto - Unavailable
Kornet - Come on
Gafford - Ditto
Felicio - Even more so

Those were all his potential bigs, including 3s that could be regarded as bigs when running a small lineup. It's pretty difficult to play those cards.

I added this as an edit to my last post:

to start q4 it was Sato, Arch, Val, Pwill, Young.

Lavine, Kornet Temple and White then replaced Sato, Thad, PWill and Arch at around 7:30

At 5:46 WCJ replaced Kornet.

At 4:17 Thad replaced Val (so Val got 8 minutes in q4 of a close game against a top tier team)

At 2:31 PWill came in for Carter.

That is a rotation that screams "I have no idea who to play". At no point did Billy ever have his best 5 on the court in q4.

Sato, Zach, Temple, Thad and White off ball should have been the lineup for the last 8 minutes of q4

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[CobyWhite0]

If you want to know why Val is getting so many minutes:

3/3/21 — No-trade restriction lifts on Denzel Valentine.

[MrSparkle]

If you want to know why Val is getting so many minutes:

3/3/21 — No-trade restriction lifts on Denzel Valentine.

This is a good point. I can see Lakers, Nets or Clippers showing interest. 28th pick for Denzel? Sure why not.

Here's an idea: Valentine & Lauri for Dinwiddie, BRK FRP. Perhaps add Gafford or Arci to seal the deal.

Resign Spencer, let him recover slowly and we have a good long-term solution to this positional dilemma.

[Stratmaster]

If you want to know why Val is getting so many minutes:

3/3/21 — No-trade restriction lifts on Denzel Valentine.

I hope that is the plan!

Sent from my SM-G965U using RealGM mobile app

[chefo]

Again, you can't win against the best in the biz with too many kids closing games. I kinda' get why Coach D is doing it, but I guess I am old school when it comes to entitlement minutes.

Chris Paul just ate Coby's lunch in the 4th (it's possible he would have done the same to Sato as well), and as a team, the Suns doubled hard on Zach, so somebody had to step up. We didn't have anybody on the floor to make a simple play like a layup because everybody got so spastic when Zach started getting frustrated. One of Coby's current problems, for example, which Coach D has spoken about, is that his effort tends to suffer when he doesn't do well on the court and it tanks his entire game. He's been better about it the last 2-3 games, but we were back to Coby looking horrible on both ends last night, especially in the 4th.

The problem is, at least at this point of his young career, you can't trust Coby to be the main ball-handler/PG on the court in a tight game. We tried that for 20 games to start the season to disastrous consequences, and only started to win big after Coby got moved off-ball for 90% of his time. I was surprised to see Coby try to run things in the 4th last night. I thought we were beyond that.

You can tell Zach was getting flustered badly last night because nobody could do anything, and by anybody I mean the two guys that got to touch the ball in the 4th the most apart from him--WCJ and Coby seemed like a TO or a miss waiting to happen every time down the floor. As sad as it was, as soon as Luke came off, WCJ was so bad that the wheels completely fell off. Having ice-cold Val on the floor didn't help either.

My only major gripe with coach D is that he seems to let guys figure it out, even when they are obviously struggling a lot. My wife is a child psychologist so I am not in the school of "learn to swim in the deep end". You need to set difficult goals the 'young' guys can realistically conquer, but not too impossible to completely discourage / demotivate them. And, give them a nudge a bit when they get stuck in quick sand. His leash has been particularly long with Coby who earlier this year had a horrible 15 game stretch where he looked out-the-league bad on both sides of the court, but we didn't run a play for him to get his confidence up, or help him on D, when he was getting abused, etc. Given how much of the pro game is about confidence, I'm not a fan of learning by getting your face smashed up every game.

When I advocated for Coby to play off-ball off-the-bench, it's not because I'm a Coby hater, but because I'm a Bulls fan first and foremost, and I think both the team AND Coby would be better served if he learns how to walk first, before they ask him to run (the offense). Same goes for PaW. He was getting destroyed nightly by design--I get the whole trial by fire thing, but these are two 20 year olds who were getting embarrassed nightly, while more productive older vets were sitting on the bench (Otto, before his back gave out, and Sato post Covid) and us racking up losses because of it.

Again, I understand what they're doing, but man, it sucks knowing that guys are sitting on the bench who can help you win, and the kids are running amok with barely any adult supervision. Both Coby and WCJ had a really good stretch after they got benched. I think they need more of that in the early careers.

[nomorezorro]

i know posting on a basketball message board inherently involves amateurs second-guessing the decision-making of professionals, but it's real funny to me when i see people going "i don't believe in entitlement minutes!" or whatever. can't even begin to imagine what's informing someone's hard-and-fast philosophy on the best approach for developing an nba player

i think one thing that's abundantly clear about donovan is that he isn't an outcome-driven guy. after a sloppy win, he won't get too high, and after a loss where shots just weren't falling, he doesn't get too low. based on this, i would suspect his rotation decision-making is happening on a macro level, and you're not going to see him snap and abandon the young guys to win a single game except for rare occasions.

i think we're getting to a point in the season where you could argue we have enough macro information to decide that, say, coby white as starting PG isn't really paying enough dividends. i think the all star break/trade deadline sheds a ton of light on the big-picture direction the team is going in, and the decision on whether to make lineup changes will align with that.

[coldfish]

i know posting on a basketball message board inherently involves amateurs second-guessing the decision-making of professionals, but it's real funny to me when i see people going "i don't believe in entitlement minutes!" or whatever. can't even begin to imagine what's informing someone's hard-and-fast philosophy on the best approach for developing an nba player

I've never really understood this line of thought. Maybe this isn't discussed enough but a lot of the guys in professional sports positions got their job based on nepotism. Not because they were smart or qualified or hard working. Just based on who they knew. The Bulls have largely been the nepotism superhighway for the last few decades. They have hired people like Vinny del Negro or Fred Hoiberg. People who's biggest career accomplishments would have included supersizing the most big mac meals in a month had they been born 5'8". I bet if vinny del negro took an IQ test with everyone on the Bulls board regularly, he would end up bottom 25%.

These guys aren't above reproach.

[nomorezorro]

oh yeah no i agree in general that nba decision makers aren't above reproach. i just feel like player development specifically is so far removed from what you can see based on games and stats. so much happens behind the scenes, so much involves individual personalities and other dynamics you can't get a handle on as an outside observer.

over the course of a coach/executive's career you might be able to say "it seems like his approach for developing players has a record of success" or "he's never really coached a guy up". but a random guy going "i don't ever like tossing the players into the deep end!" feels so rooted in gut instincts and personal perceptions, detached from actual real world player development

[CobyWhite0]

i know posting on a basketball message board inherently involves amateurs second-guessing the decision-making of professionals, but it's real funny to me when i see people going "i don't believe in entitlement minutes!" or whatever. can't even begin to imagine what's informing someone's hard-and-fast philosophy on the best approach for developing an nba player

i think one thing that's abundantly clear about donovan is that he isn't an outcome-driven guy. after a sloppy win, he won't get too high, and after a loss where shots just weren't falling, he doesn't get too low. based on this, i would suspect his rotation decision-making is happening on a macro level, and you're not going to see him snap and abandon the young guys to win a single game except for rare occasions.

i think we're getting to a point in the season where you could argue we have enough macro information to decide that, say, coby white as starting PG isn't really paying enough dividends. i think the all star break/trade deadline sheds a ton of light on the big-picture direction the team is going in , and the decision on whether to make lineup changes will align with that.

Excellent post.

As for the underlined, we might get some clues as to the long-term direction, but there's also a pretty decent chance that even if AKME wants to make a move or three, they don't get the opportunity. They might already know they aren't signing Lauri long-term, but if they can't get anything better than a 2nd-round pick for him at the deadline, they might as well wait until this summer and try a sign-and-trade.

Or if they've decided to keep Lauri and move WCJ in favor of a shot-blocking, rim-running, rebounding center - there's no rush at all if they can't get anything decent in return, it won't hurt to wait until this summer.

They may have already decided that they don't want Thad and Sato on the roster next season, preferring the $24.19 million in cap space. If they can't get a first or a young player at the deadline, they might as well just play out the year waive-and-stretch them after the season - they'll only count $3.67 million against the cap that way.

Like you, I'm curious to see what the starting lineup and rotations look like after the ASB and after the trade deadline. I would imagine the "go all out for the playoffs" starting lineup and rotations would look quite different than the "all about development and a lottery pick" lineups?