Billy D or new coach

[Stratmaster]

If their was a college coaches HOF and a pro HOF... you know, like there is with players, Billy would not be in the NBA HOF. Do you really want to debate based on that?

I'm fine having a debate about the fact that Billy Donovan is in the HOF due to achievements in college with the additional evidence that all the pro players he coaches also respect him and think he's a good coach is not a clueless idiot, and am certainly fine agreeing that he is not an NBA HOF candidate (if they had separate HOFs). I think there is a pretty wide gap between clueless idiot (Jim Boylen level coach) and HOF coach, and Donovan falls inside that gap as a quality but not elite coach.

When Donovan eventually leaves the Bulls, he will be a head coach again somewhere (college or NBA) at big money. That just isn't something that will be true of clueless idiots.

And I am fine retracting any clueless idiot comments I have made. That is certainly too harsh. I will rephrase that without the hyperbole to "ineffective NBA head coach".

[Stratmaster]

This all seems way off-base to me.

Craig always plays hard when he's actually playing. Lavine fought through a bunch of injuries and obviously played hard this season until he was traded. I don't think Vooch lacks effort - he's just slow-footed. Williams has no motor and that's not a Billy issue. And I have no idea what you're talking about with Donovan not thinking Matas played "hard" enough - that seems totally made up. If you watched more than about 5 minutes of Matas this season, he played plenty hard. He got benched when he made dumb rookie mistakes, not for lack of effort.

Billy said that about Matas, not me. He also said he didn't train seriously enough.

Williams isn't a Billy issue? Who started him every game he was available until finally admitting defeat half way through this season? I don't think any of the other guys you mentioned lacked effort. It's the idea that their standard effort is somehow due to Billy that I disagree with.

I am not aware of any such comments by Billy re: Matas, nor can I find any when Googling for them. You may be right, but I'm not aware of it.

And, yes, I don't think the fact that Patrick Williams has no motor has anything whatsoever to do with Billy Donovan and it is curious that. you apparently do.

I never said it was Billy's fault Williams has no motor. I said it is Billy's fault that he continued to start him. Had the Bulls not been playing 4 against 5 the last few seasons I expect they would have had a better result.

I heard his comments about Matas not being prepared to play at the NBA level due to conditioning on 670 the score. They were actual audio clips from Billy talking about him not eating properly, not being prepared for the NBA schedule. Not being prepared for the level of exertion required in the NBA or the level of competition. To be fair, Billy has since given more toned down reasons for Matas' lack of playing time early and has praised Matas for wanting to be coached hard and accepting those criticisms.

EDIT: the ironic thing... Billy has said numerous times that young players shouldn't be gifted minutes. Usually followed up by a question about Patrick Williams lol

[jnrjr79]

Billy said that about Matas, not me. He also said he didn't train seriously enough.

Williams isn't a Billy issue? Who started him every game he was available until finally admitting defeat half way through this season? I don't think any of the other guys you mentioned lacked effort. It's the idea that their standard effort is somehow due to Billy that I disagree with.

I am not aware of any such comments by Billy re: Matas, nor can I find any when Googling for them. You may be right, but I'm not aware of it.

And, yes, I don't think the fact that Patrick Williams has no motor has anything whatsoever to do with Billy Donovan and it is curious that. you apparently do.

I never said it was Billy's fault Williams has no motor. I said it is Billy's fault that he continued to start him. Had the Bulls not been playing 4 against 5 the last few seasons I expect they would have had a better result.

I heard his comments about Matas not being prepared to play at the NBA level due to conditioning on 670 the score. They were actual audio clips from Billy talking about him not eating properly, not being prepared for the NBA schedule. Not being prepared for the level of exertion required in the NBA or the level of competition. To be fair, Billy has since given more toned down reasons for Matas' lack of playing time early and has praised Matas for wanting to be coached hard and accepting those criticisms.

EDIT: the ironic thing... Billy has said numerous times that young players shouldn't be gifted minutes. Usually followed up by a question about Patrick Williams lol

I think it's perfectly fair to be critical of Billy for sticking with Patrick too long. But, he did bench Patrick in favor of Matas as the season progressed.

[dougthonus]

And I am fine retracting any clueless idiot comments I have made. That is certainly too harsh. I will rephrase that without the hyperbole to "ineffective NBA head coach".

Fair enough, I think that probably closes the gap considerably between our stated thoughts, and while I'm still certainly a bit higher on him than you, I'm probably being overly semantic and sensitive. I don't really care a whole lot about Donovan, because I think the head coach is irrelevant right now given the overall senior leadership.

I think perhaps the biggest problem I might have with BD (hard to gauge how much of a problem this is) is that he's part of that senior leadership, likely has input into management decisions, and is probably part of choosing the players and direction of the road to nowhere.

[sco]

Yeah, we've had many worse coaches. Billy is a good coach. That said, I think there are many better coaches out there; however, I don't think that AK is looking for the best coach. He's looking for a "good enough" coach who is going to tow the company line with players and the media regarding matters that could blow back on AK. Billy seems like a perfect fit for those qualifications.

[Stratmaster]

I am not aware of any such comments by Billy re: Matas, nor can I find any when Googling for them. You may be right, but I'm not aware of it.

And, yes, I don't think the fact that Patrick Williams has no motor has anything whatsoever to do with Billy Donovan and it is curious that. you apparently do.

I never said it was Billy's fault Williams has no motor. I said it is Billy's fault that he continued to start him. Had the Bulls not been playing 4 against 5 the last few seasons I expect they would have had a better result.

I heard his comments about Matas not being prepared to play at the NBA level due to conditioning on 670 the score. They were actual audio clips from Billy talking about him not eating properly, not being prepared for the NBA schedule. Not being prepared for the level of exertion required in the NBA or the level of competition. To be fair, Billy has since given more toned down reasons for Matas' lack of playing time early and has praised Matas for wanting to be coached hard and accepting those criticisms.

EDIT: the ironic thing... Billy has said numerous times that young players shouldn't be gifted minutes. Usually followed up by a question about Patrick Williams lol

I think it's perfectly fair to be critical of Billy for sticking with Patrick too long. But, he did bench Patrick in favor of Matas as the season progressed.

Yes. After 4.5 seasons Billy finally made the change.

[jnrjr79]

I never said it was Billy's fault Williams has no motor. I said it is Billy's fault that he continued to start him. Had the Bulls not been playing 4 against 5 the last few seasons I expect they would have had a better result.

I heard his comments about Matas not being prepared to play at the NBA level due to conditioning on 670 the score. They were actual audio clips from Billy talking about him not eating properly, not being prepared for the NBA schedule. Not being prepared for the level of exertion required in the NBA or the level of competition. To be fair, Billy has since given more toned down reasons for Matas' lack of playing time early and has praised Matas for wanting to be coached hard and accepting those criticisms.

EDIT: the ironic thing... Billy has said numerous times that young players shouldn't be gifted minutes. Usually followed up by a question about Patrick Williams lol

I think it's perfectly fair to be critical of Billy for sticking with Patrick too long. But, he did bench Patrick in favor of Matas as the season progressed.

Yes. After 4.5 seasons Billy finally made the change.

Yep. And I'm not sure why anyone is particularly chuffed with Billy giving a high lottery pick a long leash on a middling team that wasn't going to win anything meaningful, anyway.

If you want to be mad about Patrick Williams (and I am!), I'd be mad at Patrick himself and at the FO that elected to extend him.

[Stratmaster]

I think it's perfectly fair to be critical of Billy for sticking with Patrick too long. But, he did bench Patrick in favor of Matas as the season progressed.

Yes. After 4.5 seasons Billy finally made the change.

Yep. And I'm not sure why anyone is particularly chuffed with Billy giving a high lottery pick a long leash on a middling team that wasn't going to win anything meaningful, anyway.

If you want to be mad about Patrick Williams (and I am!), I'd be mad at Patrick himself and at the FO that elected to extend him.

You seem to be willing to accept anything from Billy. Remember, this is the same coach who said Matas hadn't prepared himself for the season, and that is why he wasn't getting playing time, and then changed the story to "you can't just give a young player entitlement minutes. They have to earn them". So which is it. Why wasn't Matas starting day 1 for this middling team that wasn't going anywhere. He was certainly as prepared as PWill ever was. It was jaw dropping to hear him say that when the conversation was ABOUT Williams starting over Matas. And at this point, he had 4 years of results to tell him Williams wasn't the guy. I mean, seriously?

There were a lot of us who really wanted to see Giddey, Lavine and Matas starting with either Coby or Ayo and Vuc/Smith(I preferred Ayo/Smith...some some preferred Coby). We never got to see it and I think that was a huge mistake. Instead, PWill got his entitlement minutes. 20% of the Bulls starting lineup from the day he entered the league, after never even starting in college. And people wonder why this team never gelled into anything?

[jnrjr79]

Yes. After 4.5 seasons Billy finally made the change.

Yep. And I'm not sure why anyone is particularly chuffed with Billy giving a high lottery pick a long leash on a middling team that wasn't going to win anything meaningful, anyway.

If you want to be mad about Patrick Williams (and I am!), I'd be mad at Patrick himself and at the FO that elected to extend him.

You seem to be willing to accept anything from Billy. Remember, this is the same coach who said Matas hadn't prepared himself for the season, and that is why he wasn't getting playing time, and then changed the story to "you can't just give a young player entitlement minutes. They have to earn them". So which is it. Why wasn't Matas starting day 1 for this middling team that wasn't going anywhere. He was certainly as prepared as PWill ever was. It was jaw dropping to hear him say that when the conversation was ABOUT Williams starting over Matas. And at this point, he had 4 years of results to tell him Williams wasn't the guy. I mean, seriously?

Yeah, none of this bothers me much, and I'm not sure why it seems to enrage you.

I wanted Matas to play more at the beginning of the year, too, but he seemed to develop well, so I'm not really sure why to be upset about it.

I guess I fail to see why Matas not being ready at the start of the season is a Billy Donovan issue, unless you think he's lying about it.

There were a lot of us who really wanted to see Giddey, Lavine and Matas starting with either Coby or Ayo and Vuc/Smith(I preferred Ayo/Smith...some some preferred Coby). We never got to see it and I think that was a huge mistake. Instead, PWill got his entitlement minutes. 20% of the Bulls starting lineup from the day he entered the league, after never even starting in college. And people wonder why this team never gelled into anything?

I do not think it was a "huge mistake" that we did not get to see a starting lineup combination that included Zach LaVine, a player destined to be traded this season. The idea that it was a "huge" mistake just seems totally bonkers. How so? Did we fail to unlock a lineup that would have led the team to 60 wins? Of course not. You can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic all you want. This team was not going to do appreciably better than it did under any circumstance. This team never "gelled" to anything because of its overall talent level, not because Patrick Williams was given a relatively long leash before being benched.

I think the difference of opinion here is you appear to hold a much higher view of the level of talent on the roster than most others do.

[kodo]

I do not think it was a "huge mistake" that we did not get to see a starting lineup combination that included Zach LaVine, a player destined to be traded this season. The idea that it was a "huge" mistake just seems totally bonkers. How so? Did we fail to unlock a lineup that would have led the team to 60 wins? Of course not. You can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic all you want. This team was not going to do appreciably better than it did under any circumstance. This team never "gelled" to anything because of its overall talent level, not because Patrick Williams was given a relatively long leash before being benched.

I think the difference of opinion here is you appear to hold a much higher view of the level of talent on the roster than most others do.

The post trade starting lineup with Giddey at PG and Coby at SG and Matas starting / Pwill demoted was on a 63% win rate, which is a 52 win season. That would have been 3rd seed in the EC.Some of that was an easier part of the schedule. Some of that was just Giddey getting better over the season as a 22 year old. So probably not a full 52 win season, but better than what we saw.

Nobody is putting up goals of "60 win or you're fired." It's a binary question of was the starting lineup at the start of season the best utilized version of the team we had. The answer is a clear no to me, and a lot of people said the same thing before we even played one game.

But he did change the lineup, so gotta give him some credit. A lot of coaches would have refused any major changes post training camp, even good ones like Thibs.

[sco]

I do not think it was a "huge mistake" that we did not get to see a starting lineup combination that included Zach LaVine, a player destined to be traded this season. The idea that it was a "huge" mistake just seems totally bonkers. How so? Did we fail to unlock a lineup that would have led the team to 60 wins? Of course not. You can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic all you want. This team was not going to do appreciably better than it did under any circumstance. This team never "gelled" to anything because of its overall talent level, not because Patrick Williams was given a relatively long leash before being benched.

I think the difference of opinion here is you appear to hold a much higher view of the level of talent on the roster than most others do.

The post trade starting lineup with Giddey at PG and Coby at SG and Matas starting / Pwill demoted was on a 63% win rate, which is a 52 win season. That would have been 3rd seed in the EC.Some of that was an easier part of the schedule. Some of that was just Giddey getting better over the season as a 22 year old. So probably not a full 52 win season, but better than what we saw.

Nobody is putting up goals of "60 win or you're fired." It's a binary question of was the starting lineup at the start of season the best utilized version of the team we had. The answer is a clear no to me, and a lot of people said the same thing before we even played one game.

But he did change the lineup, so gotta give him some credit. A lot of coaches would have refused any major changes post training camp, even good ones like Thibs.

Yeah, Billy will change line-ups but it takes a lot for him to do that.

[jnrjr79]

I do not think it was a "huge mistake" that we did not get to see a starting lineup combination that included Zach LaVine, a player destined to be traded this season. The idea that it was a "huge" mistake just seems totally bonkers. How so? Did we fail to unlock a lineup that would have led the team to 60 wins? Of course not. You can rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic all you want. This team was not going to do appreciably better than it did under any circumstance. This team never "gelled" to anything because of its overall talent level, not because Patrick Williams was given a relatively long leash before being benched.

I think the difference of opinion here is you appear to hold a much higher view of the level of talent on the roster than most others do.

The post trade starting lineup with Giddey at PG and Coby at SG and Matas starting / Pwill demoted was on a 63% win rate, which is a 52 win season. That would have been 3rd seed in the EC.Some of that was an easier part of the schedule. Some of that was just Giddey getting better over the season as a 22 year old. So probably not a full 52 win season, but better than what we saw.

Nobody is putting up goals of "60 win or you're fired." It's a binary question of was the starting lineup at the start of season the best utilized version of the team we had. The answer is a clear no to me, and a lot of people said the same thing before we even played one game.

But he did change the lineup, so gotta give him some credit. A lot of coaches would have refused any major changes post training camp, even good ones like Thibs.

I think you correctly identify why it isn't reasonable to extrapolate that the end of the season results shouldn't be used as a projection for total season results: the Bulls played some bad teams, some intentionally tanking teams, and some good teams with primary stars with short-term injuries. I would not put anything into it.

This team lacks the talent to be a top 4 team in the east and it's pretty obvious.